California hustles in Clean Tech

California leads... but other states and countries are catching up...and bypassing California in clean tech niche.

Fast-growing fields include solar energy, wind power and environmental remediation.

Investment data collected by the Cleantech Venture Network in Brighton, Mich., capture the accelerating interest in green technologies. In 2005, it recorded $1.6 billion of investments in clean-tech startups. In just the first six months of this year, nearly $1.4 billion has already poured into this field, with much of that money flowing to startups in solar, wind or other renewable energies.

Silicon Valley venture capitalist John Doerr said clean technology could be as big tomorrow as computer chips, biotechnology and the Internet were yesterday

If California has embarked on a race to lead the world into a new energy future, it's going to have to fight many skirmishes on many fronts.

In July, for instance, the American Wind Energy Association reported that "Texas for the first time supplanted historic leader California as the top state in cumulative wind power capacity," ending the bragging rights that the latter first earned 25 years ago when it built its first wind farms.

WIND

Figures from the California Energy Commission show that wind power produces roughly seven times more of the state's electricity than solar, which tends to get far more attention.

SOLAR

Even before passage of the greenhouse bill, solar energy startups were sprouting in Silicon Valley. Firms such as SunPower Corp. are already making what are among the world's most efficient solar energy systems, and startups like Nanosolar -- which in June announced plans to build a $100 million plant in the Bay Area -- are pioneering new ways to turn sunlight into electricity.

Leadership

Margaret Bruce, with the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, whose 200 member firms include the current high-tech and biotech leaders, voiced the optimistic opinion that dealing with greenhouse gases would offer business opportunities for this region and for California.

"As we develop the tool bag to respond to global warming, we'll have the tools to sell to the rest of the world," she said.

Craig Cuddeback, senior vice president with the Cleantech Group in Michigan, said the venture capital investments in this emerging field show more money flowing to regions like the Northeast, Southeast and Midwest -- suggesting that California and Silicon Valley are going to have to work harder to satisfy their ambitions of being the world's green tool makers.

Global Environment Fund

Global Environment Fund (GEF) is an international investment firm that invests in emerging markets, clean technology and forestry. The firm manages private equity funds totaling approximately $800 million and limited partners include prominent endowments, foundations, family offices and pension funds.

GEF was established in 1990 to provide financing and management support to companies that contribute to environmental quality efficient use of energy, human health and the sustainable management of natural resources. The firm's investments focus is on especially on companies whose business operations deliver measurable environmental improvements through deployment of improved environmental infrastructure, management and clean technologies. GEF's investment objective is to provide superior returns by harnessing the power of technological innovation and capital investment to promote energy sources and means of production that are cleaner, more efficient, cheaper, and more sustainable.

Clean Edge - the Clean-Tech Market Authority

Clean Edge is a leading clean-tech research and consulting firm with offices in the San Francisco, Bay Area and Portland, Oregon.

Clean Edge launched in 2001 by environmental and high-tech business pioneers Ron Pernick and Joel Makower. They provide a variety of services including research and publishing, strategic consulting, and co-producing the annual Clean-Tech Investor Summit. Clean Edge tracks and analyzes clean-tech markets, trends, and opportunities and offers unparalleled insight and intelligence to its customers through an extensive network of partners and affiliates. In May 2006, the company launched the NASDAQ Clean Edge US Index® which tracks US-listed clean-energy companies.

The NASDAQ Clean Edge U.S. Index is calculated using a modified market capitalization methodology. The index will be calculated and disseminated on a price return basis (NASDAQ: CLEN) and a total return basis (NASDAQ: CLNX).


For more information about Clean Edge,
e-mail info@cleanedge.com, or
call 503.493.8681.
http://www.cleanedge.com

Turning Corn and Manure into Ethanol

Remember buffalo chips? How the native americans burned dried buffalo chips for heat and cooking? We're at it again!

Turning waste products into productive products is the new trend in greening and zero waste thinking. However, growing corn for energy isn't quite as efficient as using byproducts. And we also have to ask if all these cattle being grown are effective use of our land, vegetation, clean air, etc. in order to get their waste products for moving cars down the road. But in the meantime...we're in a transition to understanding that there is no waste in nature. Everything but the squeal is useful in some way. Here's a step toward that goal...



Panda Ethanol to Build its Second 100 Million Gallon Plant in Texas

November 2, 2006 - Source: Clean Edge News

Panda Ethanol Inc. announced that it intends to build a 100 million gallon-per-year ethanol plant near the city of Muleshoe in Bailey County, Texas. When finished, the facility will annually refine approximately 38 million bushels of corn into a clean-burning, renewable fuel for the nation's transportation needs. The ethanol produced by the plant will displace approximately 2.6 million barrels of imported oil a year.

The Muleshoe facility will generate the steam used in the ethanol manufacturing process by gasifying more than 1 billion pounds of cattle manure a year. Once complete, it will be one of the most fuel efficient ethanol refineries in the nation and equal in size to Panda's Hereford facility, currently under construction, which will be the largest biomass-fueled ethanol plant in the United States.

The Muleshoe facility is the sixth 100 million gallon ethanol project announced by Panda, and the fourth to be powered by cattle manure. The company has received air permits for three of its six announced ethanol projects.

CA Energy Commission Funds Environmental Business Cluster

Funding Helps Scientists Bring Clean Energy Solutions to Market

SAN JOSE, Calif., Oct. 31 /PRNewswire/ -- San Jose State University (SJSU) Foundation announced today that its Environmental Business Cluster (EBC) was awarded a contract that will be worth $330,000 over the next year in new funding by the California Energy Commission to continue working with startup companies who focus on research and development for clean and renewable energy and energy efficiency.

This is the fourth consecutive year that the California Energy Commission has relied on the EBC to help its grant recipients commercialize their technologies and bring new products to market.

"There's an incredible amount of attention and enthusiasm for clean and renewable energy from both the public and private sectors," said Jim Robbins, EBC executive director. "We work with entrepreneurs who start companies and have proven technology, but lack customers or financing.

"Our program is designed to assist in the creation of a commercialization plan while guiding the entrepreneur to remove the barriers to bringing their technology to market."

The EBC management team provides entrepreneurs with top-tier business development services and access to networks of industry specialists and investors. Staff and consultants work directly with each entrepreneur for up to one year providing help with market research, business and marketing plans, as well as preparation with investor and customer presentations.

"When the California Energy Commission initially funded this program in 2003 the goal was to take one or two companies to the marketplace," said Mary Sidney, chief operating officer at SJSU Foundation. "Within two years the EBC successfully brought 13 new companies to market."

The EBC was the first incubator for businesses that focuses on environmental products or services and is now the largest private incubator focused on clean and renewable energy. Since 1995 the EBC has graduated 90 companies whose technologies solve serious environmental problems including reliance on foreign oil.

Through a partnership with the City of San Jose Redevelopment Agency and SJSU Foundation, the downtown San Jose incubator typically works with 30 startup companies who are working on technologies to provide solutions including solar, wind, hydrogen, wave energy, energy efficiency and hybrid fuels.

About San Jose State University (SJSU) Foundation

The SJSU Foundation operates and manages four business incubators in partnership with the San Jose Redevelopment Agency. The SJSU Foundation manages the incubator facilities, provides world-class business development services, and access to faculty experts and student interns for high- potential, early-stage companies through the Environmental Business Cluster, Software Business Cluster and San Jose BioCenter. San Jose's incubator program also includes business development services for international companies planning to establish and grow their business in the United States through the fourth incubator, the U.S. Market Access Center. The Redevelopment Agency provides state-of-the-art facilities to house the incubators.

For nearly 75 years, the SJSU Foundation has provided the expertise and business infrastructure enabling University faculty to partner successfully with government agencies, corporations, and foundations to perform cutting- edge research, public service, and other specialized projects that are vital to a community of scholars and to society as a whole. As a private non-profit corporation, the Foundation manages approximately $69 million per year in research and public service programs directed by SJSU faculty and SJSU- affiliated experts such as the directors of the four business incubators.

About the Environmental Business Cluster

The Environmental Business Cluster was created to help bring environmental technology and products to the market, improve the chances for business success and increase the linkages between emerging companies and established businesses, universities and professionals in the field. The primary focus of the Environmental Business Cluster is on emerging clean energy products and technologies. Located in San Jose, CA, it offers both resident and non- resident programs. More information is available at www.environmentalcluster.org .

Environmental Business Cluster
2 North First Street , Fourth floor
San Jose , CA 95113
408) 938-3920
Fax (408) 271-1904
Jim Robbins, Director
jarobbins@aol.com

Substitute 20 Chemicals of Concern over Two Years

Suppliers will Substitute 20 Chemicals of Concern over Two Years

BENTONVILLE, Ark., Oct. 30, 2006 – Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE: WMT) today announced its plans to inspire innovation in chemicals used in various product selections. The company will begin implementing its "Preferred Chemical Principles" to establish a clear set of preferred chemical characteristics for product ingredients. The purpose is to drive the development of more sustainable products for mother, child and the environment.

The first three of these priority chemicals are being announced at the Molecule-to-Molecule meeting, a two-day event hosted by the Chemical Intensive Product Network (CIP), a group designed to engage suppliers, NGO's, government, academics and other subject matter experts on issues and opportunities around product sustainability.

"One of our environmental goals at Wal-Mart is to sell products that sustain our resources and our environment," said John Westling, senior vice president and general merchandise manager, Merchandise Division, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. "We are excited about how this set of principles will help move us toward more sustainable products for mother, child and the environment, and the three priority chemicals we are focusing on are a first step in implementation. We plan to extend this effort to 17 additional chemicals over the next two years. We anticipate that our efforts will encourage our suppliers and their suppliers to innovate new product formulations that will be better for our customers and for the environment."

The company has adopted a three-stage process to drive innovation and inspire suppliers to find substitutes for chemicals of concern. The three stages include,

(1) Awareness - where participating suppliers will be given a period to identify for Wal-Mart any of their products that currently use one of the priority chemicals as ingredients,

(2) Development of an Action Plan - where suppliers communicate to Wal-Mart their plans regarding the Priority Chemicals in their products, and

(3) Recognition and Reward - where Wal-Mart acknowledges the suppliers who participate in this effort..

The first three chemicals include

Two pesticides:

propoxur and permethrin (both used in household insect control products)

...and an ingredient in some cleaning products:

nonyl phenol ethoxylates (NPE).

The company's preference is to move to alternative chemicals that meet the Wal-Mart Preferred Chemical Principles in its efforts toward a more sustainable future.

For more information on Wal-Mart's sustainability efforts, please visit www.walmartfacts.com or www.walmartstores.com.

Climate change now Americans' #1 environmental concern

2006 Survey of Public Attitudes on Energy and the Environment

Climate change now Americans' #1 environmental concern, MIT survey finds Nancy Stauffer; MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment

According to a recent MIT survey, Americans now rank climate change as the country's most pressing environmental problem—a dramatic shift from three years ago, when they ranked climate change sixth out of 10 environmental concerns.

Almost three-quarters of the respondents felt the government should do more to deal with global warming, and individuals were willing to spend their own money to help.

"While terrorism and the war in Iraq are the main issues of national concern, there’s been a remarkable increase in the American public's recognition of global warming and their willingness to do something about it," said Stephen Ansolabehere, MIT's Elting R. Morison Professor of Political Science.

The survey results were released Oct. 31 at the seventh annual Carbon Sequestration Forum, an international meeting held at MIT that focuses on methods of capturing and storing emissions of carbon dioxide—a major contributor to climate change.

Ansolabehere's colleagues on the work are Howard Herzog, principal research engineer in MIT's Laboratory for Energy and the Environment (LFEE), LFEE research associates Thomas E. Curry and Mark de Figueiredo, and Professor David M. Reiner of the University of Cambridge.

The findings are a result of two surveys, the first administered in September 2003 and the follow-up in September 2006. Each survey included about 20 questions focusing on the environment, global warming, and a variety of climate-change-mitigation technologies.

In designing and administering the surveys, the research team collaborated with Knowledge Networks, a company that specializes in Internet-based public opinion surveys. More than 1,200 people answered each survey (with no overlap between the two groups of respondents).

Comparing results from the two surveys provides insights into how public awareness, concern, and understanding have changed—or not changed—during the past three years.

The environment continues to rank in the middle of the list of "most important issues facing the U.S. today." However, among 10 environmental problems, global warming (or climate change) now tops the list: Almost half the respondents put global warming in first or second place. In 2003, the destruction of ecosystems, water pollution, and toxic waste were far higher priorities.

There is also an increased sense that global warming is an established problem. In the 2006 survey, 28 percent of the respondents agreed that it is a serious problem and immediate action is necessary—up from 17 percent in 2003. All together, almost 60 percent of the 2006 respondents agreed that there’s enough evidence to warrant some level of action.

The other big change is a substantial increase in people’s willingness to spend their own money to do something about it. In 2003, people were willing to pay on average $14 more per month on their electricity bill to "solve" global warming. In 2006 they agreed to pay $21 more per month—a 50 percent increase in their willingness to pay.

Could $21 make a real difference? Assuming 100 million U.S. households, total payments would be $25 billion per year. "That's real money," said Herzog. "While it cannot solve the whole problem, it can certainly make significant strides."

For context, Ansolabehere pointed out that the U.S. Department of Energy’s budget for energy R&D is now about $2 billion per year. "Another reading of this outcome is that people want not a little bit more spent but rather a lot more spent to solve this problem—and they’re willing to pay," he said.

The MIT team undertook the original survey in 2003 to find out what the public thought about carbon capture and storage (CCS), an approach that Herzog and his LFEE colleagues had been studying for more than a decade. The team was not surprised to find that more than 90 percent of the respondents had never heard of CCS. The 2006 survey showed similar results.

In general, the respondents' understanding of climate change and possible mitigation technologies showed little change between 2003 and 2006. In terms of their technology preferences, in 2006 most still recommended using more wind and solar energy and increasing efficiency, but more were willing to consider CCS and nuclear energy as possible approaches.

"It’s not that people have learned something fundamental about the science, but they’ve come to understand that this problem is real," said Ansolabehere. "It takes a prolonged discussion of a complex topic like this really to move public concern, and what’s happened over the past three years has got to continue."

The researchers plan to analyze the survey results in more depth, in particular to test for correlations between answers to questions and the economic, political, geographical, and other demographic characteristics of the respondents.

This research was supported by the MIT Carbon Sequestration Initiative.

Hormonally-active compounds were found in young girls

Abstract of Pilot Study

In a pilot study of young girls in 3 US cities, a wide spectrum of hormonally-active compounds were found, some at relatively high concentrations. Eighteen of 25 measured compounds were found in at least 94% of subjects. Phytoestrogens as a group had the highest levels and were most frequently found; phthalates were intermediate. Four phytoestrogens, four phthalates and two phenols had maximum values above 1 ppm.

Background: Hormonally active environmental agents have been measured among U.S. children using exposure biomarkers in urine. However, little is known about their variation by race, age, sex and geography, and no data exist for newly developed biomarkers.

Objective: To characterize relevant, prevalent exposures for a study of female pubertal development.

Methods: In a pilot study among 90 girls from New York City, Cincinnati, and northern California, we measured 25 urinary analytes representing 22 separate agents from three chemical families: phytoestrogens, phthalates, and phenols. Exposures occur chiefly from the diet and from household or personal care products.

Conclusions: A wide spectrum of hormonally active exposure biomarkers were detectable and variable among young girls, with high maximal concentrations (>1000 ug/L) found for several analytes. They varied by characteristics that may be relevant to development.

Environmental Health News

Environmental Health News

Get quick access to breaking stories around the world.

New Reports: By organizations working to protect human health from environmental exposures.

Understand new scientific results that expand knowledge of environmental links to health.

It's environmentally friendly fire

(By JON UNGOD-THOMAS)


BAE SYSTEMS, one of the world's biggest arms manufacturers, is designing a new generation of "green" munitions, including "lead-free" bullets and rockets with reduced toxins.

It also wants to cut the dangerous compounds in its jets, fighting vehicles and artillery, which it warns "can harm the environment and pose a risk to people".

The initiative is being backed by the Ministry of Defence, which has proposed quieter warheads to reduce noise pollution and grenades that produce less smoke. There have even been experiments to see if explosives can be turned into manure.

Dr Debbie Allen, director of corporate social responsibility at BAE Systems, said that although it might seem strange to have a green policy for munitions, it was important to consider the environmental impact of all products.

"Weapons are going to be used and when they are, we try to make them as safe for the user as possible, to limit the collateral damage and to impact as little as possible on the environment," she said.

BAE’s policy reflects the eagerness among big companies to trumpet their environmental concerns. The concept of “green munitions” has, however, infuriated campaigners opposed to the arms trade.

"This is laughable," said Symon Hill of Campaign Against Arms Trade. "BAE is determined to try to make itself look ethical, but they make weapons to kill people and it’s utterly ridiculous to suggest they are environmentally friendly."

During the Iraq war, Britain dropped more than 900 bombs while the United States has admitted dropping 1,500 cluster bombs, which detonate numerous explosions over a large area, and anti-landmine campaigners have sought to ban them. The exact death toll is unknown.

BAE's policy is endorsed by the MoD, which stresses the importance of environmentally friendly munitions in its Sustainable Development and Environment Manual. It says "ecodesign" should be incorporated into all modern weapons.

It states: "A concept of green munitions is not a contradiction in terms. Any system, whatever its ultimate use, can be designed to minimise its impact (on the) environment."

Rockets fired in "sensitive marine environments" could have reduced emissions to protect the sea-life, the manual suggests. Also, weapons used for training purposes could be modified. Ideas include biodegradable plastics for missiles, “reduced smoke” grenades and quieter warheads.

The American military has also developed a sustainability strategy. One document on the US Army Sustainability website discusses the possible use of soybean oil in jet fuel, the use of solar panels in the conflict zone and hydrogen-powered miniature aerial vehicles.


...aye, yih, yih! Why don't we put this effort into preventing war?