In 2009 alone, the military consumed some 375,000 barrels of oil per day, more than three-quarters of all other countries on the planet. To put that in perspective, Nigeria — with a population of more than 140 million — consumes about the same amount.

During the decades of cheap fuel and easy access, feeding this complex system spread over 820 global installations was of little concern. In today’s economic climate, however, the Department of Defense (DoD) has had to adapt its energy strategy.

“The stakes could not be higher,” Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said in a statement earlier this year. “Energy reform will make us better fighters. In the end, it is a matter of energy independence and it is a matter of national security. Our dependence on foreign sources of petroleum makes us vulnerable in too many ways.”

According to a recent report by the Pew Charitable Trusts, the DoD is taking aim at its annual $15 billion energy budget with a focus on efficiency and development of renewable, clean fuels — three areas that are pivotal in the race to create a more efficient fighting force and strengthen America’s energy independence.

THE AGE OF DOMESTIC BIOFUELS

As the world’s largest single consumer of liquid fuels, the DoD is taking ambitious steps to source alternatives. The Obama administration recently announced a joint partnership between private-sector companies, the Department of Agriculture, U.S. Navy, and the Department of Energy to invest $510 million in biofuel production over three years.

Both the Navy and Air Force (the latter consuming over 60 percent of DoD fuel) are experimenting with biofuel alternatives based on algae and a weedy plant called camelina. Studies have shown camelina-based jet fuel to reduce net carbon emissions from planes by almost 80 percent.

Unfortunately, current biofuels production is meager compared to what the military or commercial industries might one day demand. The government’s investment in the sector could be the impetus needed to turn it from fledgling to a serious player in the country’s energy portfolio.

“Military use of advanced biofuels could in turn validate emerging technologies and unlock private investment in future advanced biofuels production for civilian markets,” said one industry executive.

General expectations are high. The Air Force is calling for 50 percent of its domestic aviation needs to be satisfied with biofuels by 2016. The Navy’s plans are similar, with a 50 percent alternative energy mix by 2020—as well as a massive fossil-fuel independent “ Green Strike Carrier Group” by 2016.

As an example of just how valuable the U.S. biofuel market will be, the Navy alone estimates it will require a staggering 336 million gallons of biofuel annually by 2020. The division currently uses less than 300,000 gallons.

E IS FOR EFFICIENCY

As with the private sector, improvements in efficiency — from bases to vehicles — is an immediate and affordable way to dramatically cut energy consumption. According to the Pew report, a DoD decision to insulate 9 million square feet of temporary structures resulted in a daily fuel savings of more than 77,000 gallons.

The greatest argument for pursuing a more efficient military, however, can be made for the amount of lives it will save. Eighty percent of the supply convoys in Iraq and Afghanistan are fuel trucks — with over 3,000 American soldiers and contractors killed in attacks associated with fuel delivery between 2003 and 2007.

“Our adversaries are increasingly employing asymmetric tactics and energy can be a soft target,” Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn said at a Pentagon briefing last summer.

To date, the Air Force has implemented changes that include more efficient flight routes, increased use of advanced flight simulators, and development of new turbine engines that offer a 25 percent boost in energy savings.

On the ground and sea, research and development of hybrid and electric vehicles and ships is being aggressively pursued, with an eye in particular on the DoD’s fleet of over 200,000 non-tactical vehicles.

In June 2011, the Department issued a request for information from all players in the electric vehicle sector for proposals and ideas on how to deploy EVs at a cost that is competitive with internal combustion engine vehicles. Gains here will eventually make huge waves in the commercial EV industry and offer tremendous savings on fuel and delivery.

RENEWABLE SOLUTIONS

Perhaps the closest ties between the DoD and the private cleantech sector come through collaborations on sustainable sources of energy. As of April 2010, over 450 renewable initiatives (including solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass) were in use or being developed on military bases.

The shift towards sustainable sources has as much to do with security as it does with budget and autonomy. With the DoD’s heavy reliance on civilian utilities comes increased risk from interruptions due to natural disasters or terrorist attacks.

Investments in microgrids, which act as self-contained islands of clean energy generation and storage, are an ideal contingency plan. “We know this technology can save fuel and maintenance time for our deployed forces,” said Brigadier General N. Lee S. Price. “Through this project, we can obtain reliable data on these benefits — and lay the groundwork for successful use of microgrids in theater.”

Solar photovoltaic and solar thermal technologies make up the majority of the DoD renewable energy installations and are a focal point of investment.

In September of 2011, Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced the largest domestic residential rooftop solar project in history: a $334M loan to solar power provider SolarCity that will provide “up to 160,000 rooftop solar installations on top of privately run military housing complexes at 124 military bases across 34 states.” Large scale solar projects are also in development across the U.S. — including a 500-MW solar concentrator project at Fort Irwin in California.

SHOW AND TELL

Since March 2010, the DoD has held an annual ExFOB(Experimental Forward Operating Base) event offering private companies an opportunity to show off their latest advancements in “expeditionary energy capabilities.” The primary purpose of these demonstrations is to evaluate and eventually test products that can produce a more self-sufficient and mobile strike force.

According to the Pew report, up to 20 percent of a soldier’s 70- to 90-pound pack consists solely of batteries. Products such as high-efficiency solar mats, next-generation lithium batteries, and fuel cells can all make a difference.

“We view ourselves as a target-rich environment,” Secretary of the Army John McHugh said. “This is the right thing to do for the environment, for the taxpayer and, most important, the right thing to do for our soldiers.”

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com

MONTPELIER. Feb. 2, 2012. On March 21st citizens from across Vermont will participate in the state’s first “crowd-sourced” film on Vermont Energy Independence Day. This is a film project about everyday acts of carpooling, insulating an attic, changing a lightbulb, or buying local. It’s also about sweeping changes found in Vermont’s homegrown renewable energy industry, the new comprehensive state energy plan, and grassroots actions of 100 town energy committees.

Anyone with a camera and image to share of Vermont’s energy transition can participate. Video clips uploaded to a YouTube channel will be organized and edited into a feature length film by Bright Blue EcoMedia.

“Crowd-sourced films are part of the rapidly changing world of digital information and storytelling,” says Vic Guadagno, Director and Producer. “The world is changing, and social media and video storytelling is driving this transition. We’ll weave together one cohesive story, as told by hundreds of individuals. We are encouraging café’s to become Community Story Centers with musical events so Vermont musicians can create the soundtrack”.

Schools, towns, businesses, and other groups are signing up to film their energy stories, host energy independence events, and network via Facebook and other social media sites leading up to March 21st.

“Vermont is emerging as a global leader in the inevitable transition away from nonrenewable energy resources, and towards a more decentralized, renewable, safe energy future.” says Executive Producer Jon Erickson, Professor and Managing Director of the University of Vermont’s Gund Institute for Ecological Economics. “We hope to capture the diversity of ideas needed to achieve greater independence, and show the world what one small state can do.”

Erickson’s undergraduate ecological economics class is helping to build a “story corps” to seek out the “must film” energy stories across the state. Bright Blue is also networking with a range of other non-profit groups to recruit participants, including Vermont Natural Resources Council, Vermont Energy and Climate Action Network (VECAN), 350 Vermont, Vermont Public Interest Research Group, Renewable Energy Vermont, and Vermont Green.

“We have long been interested in helping to make the case for greater energy action by pulling together the stories that will inspire more people to act,” says Johanna Miller of the Vermont Natural Resource Council and coordinator of VECAN. “This film project will help create a common voice, and celebrate the grassroots energy actions sweeping the state.”

The social media campaign and film is being facilitated and produced by Bright Blue EcoMedia, the nonprofit media company that produced the regional Emmy-award winning series “Bloom” (see bloomthemovie.org). Additional information about Vermont Energy Independence Day can be found on the project’s Facebook page (facebook.com/vteid) and website (march21st.org).

Contact Vic Guadagno, Bright Blue EcoMedia
Phone: 303-247-1800  vic@brightbluemedia.org

Contact your Representatives and Senators in support of these important bills.

Energy Disclosure Bill Context
Building Energy Disclosure addresses the inability of the current marketplace to assign a value to energy efficiency in a home or building. Although energy-efficiency improvements have a tangible value in terms of energy savings and reduced annual costs, they are currently invisible in the marketplace because there is no widely used, consistent metric or method for quantifying and disclosing this information (as there is with the MPG sticker on a car). The success and fairness of such disclosure will depend in part on universal use of the same simple scoring method for each property.

S.143 Bill as Introduced

H.497 Bill as Introduced

Hearing Schedule:

The Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee Hearing
10:00 am
Wednesday, Febuary 1, 2012
State House, Room 8 in the State House.

The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee Hearing
10:30 a.m.
Friday, Febuary 3, 2012
State House, Room 41 (top floor, turn right at the top of the stairs)

Contant your Legislator

Vermont State House


115 State Street, Montpelier, VT

Energy Disclosure Legislation Benefits:

Building Energy Disclosure will provide the following direct benefits:

•    Sellers can see the value of their investment in energy efficiency improvements captured in the resale value of their buildings, encouraging investment in such improvements; and
•    Buyers may be able to consider building energy performance and related operational costs as part of their purchase decision, potentially rolling the cost of any needed improvements into long-term mortgage financing at the time of purchase.

Building Energy Disclosure will also provide the following indirect benefits:

•    Lending institutions will have a reliable method for considering energy costs as part of their underwriting criteria;
•    Appraisers will have a tool for incorporating energy performance into building valuation; and
•    Contractors will see an increase in demand for energy efficiency improvements due to their value in the marketplace, supporting job creation and economic development.

Building Energy Disclosure will also provide the following statewide benefits:

•    It will help Vermont meet our statutory goal to improve the energy efficiency of 25% of our housing stock (or 80,000 homes) by 2020, saving Vermonters money and reducing greenhouse gases.

Who wants to build a risky, dirty 1,700 mile oil pipeline across America’s heartland?

Big Oil and their lobbyists, that’s who. Guess who else? Their political puppets.

The Republican presidential candidates have a lot to say about how much they love the proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. But there’s a few crucial facts that just don’t seem to come out of their mouths. They don’t say that the pipeline is hauling highly toxic crude over some of our nation’s most critical water sources. They fail to mention how the first Keystone pipeline caused fourteen oil spills since 2010. And they NEVER say how much money Big Oil companies have given their campaigns.

Check out this video to hear what these puppets are saying about Big Oil’s pet project – and learn the truth about the dirty oil money that’s been pumped into their bank accounts.

Big Oil’s Puppets Love Keystone XL from Sierra Club National on Vimeo.

15 extraordinary people transforming the way we live: The worldwide climate-change movement started with the dreams of a few college friends.

HOW TO BREAK THROUGH
“Believe that the world can change, and commit to your part of the solution. Look at the world with clear eyes, but remain hopeful, and celebrate! When you feel challenged, reach out and reach in.”
- May Boeve

Four years ago, after despairing over the U.S. government’s failure to act on climate change, I found myself demonstrating with thousands of people in all 50 states. I wanted to know who had organized “Step It Up,” which was, at the time, the world’s largest action on climate change. When I dug around, I found it was a small group of, well, kids— May Boeve and a circle of 20-somethings—friends from Middlebury College who would soon go on to build an activist network that has organized record-breaking global protests.

What on Earth made May and the rest of the Middlebury group think they could accomplish such mass-scale actions? How did they not become paralyzed by the scale of the task? What makes May and the rest of the 350 kids heroes to me is that they never waited for an answer. They built a movement based on the desire to grow their friendship and concern for the world to include an ever larger circle.

“I wanted to be surrounded by others who wanted to change the world,” May told me. Back in college, she had, in some ways, felt isolated: It had taken her much of her college career to find a community that shared her concerns. Once she found it, she didn’t want to let it go.

While some students bond and form groups around rockclimbing or chess, May and her friends formed a community while working together to force Middlebury to reduce its carbon emissions. When they graduated, they planned to move together to Billings, Mont., to help stop the building of new coal-burning power plants. But author Bill McKibben, who brought world attention to climate change with his book The End of Nature, approached them and asked if they might instead turn the power of the group friendship to the task of building a national and, later, an international climate movement.

With McKibben’s prestige behind them, they used phones, email, social networks, web pages, and community connections to reach every grassroots and impromptu citizens’ group they could.

On April 14, 2007, their nationwide coalition mounted Step It Up—simultaneous actions in 1,400 communities across the country. Next, the group formalized itself into the organization 350.org, named for the number of parts per million of carbon dioxide that the atmosphere can safely contain, according to models by NASA scientist James Hansen.

At first, 350’s goal was to mobilize world opinion in advance of the 2009 United Nations negotiations in Copenhagen, where activists hoped world leaders would forge a binding international climate-change agreement.

On Oct. 24, 2009, they organized people in 181 countries to stage 5,200 demonstrations demanding global action on climate change: CNN called it “the most widespread day of political action in our planet’s history.”

The group succeeded in producing an incredible show of grassroots strength, but it was not enough to stop the negotiations from falling apart. When it became likely that Copenhagen would deliver no meaningful action, May and a group of other American youth attended a meeting with the United States’ chief negotiator, Todd Stern, and other members of a U.S. State Department delegation. May was crying so hard about the failure of the negotiations that she almost could not speak. She kept thinking of a group of 6,000 schoolchildren in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, who had participated in 350’s first international day of climate action: They reminded her how many lives were at stake all over the world.

She realized that there was no policy point she could make that would have an impact. The only thing she could do was appeal personally on behalf of the global movement of friends she and the 350 team had built. “I want you to know, if you fail to rise to the challenge,” she said to Stern, “that you are personally responsible to all the millions of people who have tried to let you know how important this issue is.”

Despite the disappointment at Copenhagen, the climate movement has only gotten larger and stronger. The 350.org group has continued to organize major worldwide events: a global work party in 188 countries on Oct. 10, 2010, and Moving Planet, more than 2,000 events to show the world that it’s possible to stop using fossil fuels (by traveling by bicycle, foot, boat, and other means).

This year, 350 merged with its sister grassroots organization, 1Sky, which worked exclusively in the United States. The organization itself has little official hierarchy—everybody pitches in. May has become its executive director in part because she is good at building partnerships.

Thanks to May and her crew, millions of people in thousands of locations around the world have come together to express the depth of their friendship to each other and to all of us. It is the friendship of humanity.

www.yesmagazine.org

Net metering allows residential electric customers to generate their own power using small-scale renewable energy systems. Any excess power that customers produce goes back to their utilities, essentially running their electric meters backwards. Customers then get a credit on their electric bill.

The bill allows a simple 10-day registration process for systems with capacities up to 10 kilowatts. Last year, that process was only available for systems half that size. Typical home solar systems are around 7 kilowatts. This bill also clarifies how utilities should calculate the extra six cents per kilowatt hour that people with solar net metering systems receive for the excess energy they produce.

Rep. Margaret Cheney, D-Norwich, who is vice chair of the House Committee on Natural Resources and Energy, said the bill will help clarify the benefits of net metering and simplify the process for slightly larger systems. It will also promote more renewable energy generation, she said.

“It is having real results,” Cheney said. “More small renewable energy systems are going up as a result of net metering laws.”

Vermont has allowed net metering since 1998, when it passed the first law allowing the practice.

The current law also addresses a controversy over net metering that has persisted over the years. It requires the Department of Public Service to issue a report analyzing whether and to what extent net metering systems are subsidized by other retail electric customers. The report is due Jan. 15, 2013.

Utilities and some ratepayers have raised concerns that customers with net metering systems are being subsidized by other customers.

Eric Werner, general manager of Hardwick Electric Department, said the small utilities in particular have concerns with net metering and the costs that are shifted to standard ratepayers.

The issue, Werner said, is when net metered customers provide power back to the grid because they produce more than they use, they receive retail rates for it. For example, a retail rate for electricity could be 18 cents per kilowatt-hour, but the utility pays 10 cents. The gap between retail and what the utility pays the generators of large-scale electricity is what pays for things like infrastructure upgrades and running the utility. Net metered customers, Werner said, can then use the grid but not contribute to the costs to maintain it.

“A lot of the issue is that net metered customers are getting an advantage, and costs are shifted to other customers,” Werner said.

Another issue, Werner said, is that installing things like solar systems generally requires a few thousand dollars, so the people who are getting the advantage generally have more money. For smaller utilities in particular, he said, net metering requires a large amount of time for staff to calculate the billing for customers with these renewable energy systems.

Cheney said the counter-argument to the subsidy argument is that all the small distributive generation provides a benefit to the entire state by alleviating utilities from having to make more capital investments. She said the study required in the new bill will hopefully put the debate to rest.

“If there does turn out to be a cost to ratepayers, we’ll do something about it,” Cheney said.

The bill still needs to go through a third reading and pass through the Senate.

Correction: This story originally stated that this year’s net metering bill will give people with solar net metering systems six cents more per kilowatt hour of excess solar energy. It will actually clarify how utilities calculate that extra six cents.

Governor Peter Shumlin is thinking big. His comprehensive energy plan calls for Vermont to receive 90% of its energy from renewable sources by 2050. This is an amazing goal for our state. If implemented, this plan would make the Green Mountain State a leader in clean energy and an example for the rest of the country. Vermont can do this — but the governor needs your support.

Tell Governor Shumlin and key lawmakers that you support this comprehensive energy plan.

It is a bold plan. In addition to the 90% renewable goal for 2050, the governor wants our state to get 75% of electricity from renewable sources within 20 years. We can’t let this opportunity get away. We need to speak out and let the governor know that he has the support it takes to make this happen.

Show your support today for a greener Green Mountain State!

Investing in renewable energy means cleaner air. It means fighting climate change. It means more jobs for our state. This is a historic chance for Vermont to lead the charge towards a cleaner, greener future.

As Vermonters, let’s tell the governor that we stand with him to do tough things and get this done. Let’s show him that momentum is on the side of clean energy. Our future depends on it.

Thanks,

David Van Deusen
Conservation Organizer
Sierra Club

Tell Governor Shumlin: We Support Your Plan!

TAKE ACTION TODAY!

How you can help:
1. Share this with your social network using Facebook and Twitter.
2. Copy and paste the following into a new email to friends:
Dear Friends,
I just told Governor Shumlin that I support his bold plan to move Vermont to 90% renewable energy by 2050. This will make Vermont a leader in clean energy and green jobs. We need to show the governor he has the support he needs to make this a reality.

Send a message of support today!

Find out more and send your message here: http://www.greenenergytimes.org/?p=3805

Agreement Benefits Rutland and Customers

RUTLAND, VT January 20, 2012
Formalizing agreements related to the impending sale of Central Vermont Public Service and its merger with Green Mountain Power, GMP signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the City of Rutland to ensure a strong relationship and significant benefits for Rutland in the years ahead. The MOU settles the city’s intervention in the state’s review of the sale and merger proposal, and explicitly states the city’s support for the merger.

Rutland City Mayor Christopher Louras and GMP President and CEO Mary Powell signed the MOU after the Rutland Board of Aldermen authorized its execution Thursday evening.

“Rutland will play a critical role in the future of the post-merger combined GMP/CVPS company, and the post-merger combined company should continue to play a prominent role in Rutland as well, much as CVPS has done,” the parties said in the MOU, which will be filed with the Vermont Public Service Board.

The MOU lays out a series of commitments, which the parties will ask the PSB to incorporate as conditions to its pending approval of CVPS’s sale to Gaz Métro Limited Partnership, GMP’s parent company. Once that approval is received, the companies will merge into the new Green Mountain Power.

“This agreement solidifies commitments that have been made about jobs and the company’s role in Rutland, but more importantly, it provides a foundation on which the new GMP and the City of Rutland will work together for the benefit of the city and region,” Mayor Louras said. “We have had a long, fruitful and mutually beneficial relationship with CVPS, and I believe this MOU will mark the beginning of an equally positive relationship with the new GMP.”

“The agreement represents a true partnership with the city and we look forward to exploring a range of new opportunities for Rutland,” Powell said. “We are also very pleased that Rutland recognizes the tremendous value of the merger for Vermonters, with at least $144 million in customer savings over the first 10 years.”

GMP affirmed its commitment to refrain from layoffs or mandatory relocations of employees, as well as to maintain proportional levels of its employee base headquartered in the Rutland area, which was critical to city leaders. GMP and the City will jointly pursue efforts to create opportunities, develop partnerships and attract new businesses to add additional jobs in the Rutland area, exclusive of GMP.

The new GMP will locate its Headquarters for Operations and Energy Innovation Center in Rutland or Rutland Town. The Energy Innovation Center will be a catalyst for innovative programs related to renewable energy, efficiency, customer service options, smart grid technology, and new product offerings. This could include significant new partnerships with state and federal entities, local schools and colleges, renewable energy companies and others.

GMP will also:

• Begin a collaborative, stakeholder-based engagement process immediately upon closing of the merger, or sooner, to identify a suitable location for construction or redevelopment of a new facility in downtown Rutland;
• Establish a solar city program in the Rutland area, resulting in Rutland County becoming the leading solar generation center in Vermont;
• Create a $100,000 “Open for Business Fund” at the Rutland Downtown Partnership and a $100,000 “Green Growth Fund” at the Rutland Economic Development Corp.;
• Continue CVPS’s historic level of leadership and participation in the community.

Green Mountain Power

WASHINGTON, Jan. 19 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the flowing statement after a federal judge ruled today that Vermont Yankee may continue to operate despite state efforts to close the 40-year-old reactor:

“The court today has made a decision that is, in my view, wrong on the merits and ripe for appeal. I believe the law is very clear, and that states have the right to reject nuclear power for economic and other non-safety reasons.

“It is inconceivable to me that Entergy can force Vermont to allow continued operation of Vermont Yankee, an aging and problem-plagued nuclear plant, when the people of Vermont want to move aggressively to energy efficiency and sustainable energy.

“Vermont’s laws, which Entergy agreed to abide by when it bought Vermont Yankee, require that Entergy receive a new certificate of public good in order to operate beyond March of 2012. In a very strong 26-4 bipartisan vote, the Vermont Senate voted against allowing Vermont Yankee to receive that certificate. They believed, and I believe, that the continuation of Vermont Yankee in our state is not in the best interest of Vermont.

Allowing Entergy to evade laws they agreed to abide by sets a horrendous precedent which should not be allowed to stand. The state of Vermont and other states must have the right to determine their own energy future.”

Contact: Michael Briggs (202) 224-5141

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Vermont Law School has experts available to comment on Judge Murtha’s decision today.

Professor Pat Parenteau can be reached at his office 802-831-1305 and home 802-785-4131.

Professor Cheryl Hanna can be reached on her mobile 802-233-8818.

Their bios for background:
http://www.vermontlaw.edu/Our_Faculty/Faculty_Directory/Patrick_A_Parenteau.htm
http://www.vermontlaw.edu/Our_Faculty/Faculty_Directory/Cheryl_Hanna.htm