Email Subscriptions powered by FeedBlitz

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Handpicked Breaking News, Research, and Editorial to Help Educate, Promote, and Advance the World

Dec 27, 2007

Bleaders: Yes, there are contrarians out there that do not believe in energy efficiency, and there are, in this case, researchers who have come to the unfortunate conclusion that energy efficiency will not curb energy consumption, but we cannot as a nation or as a world let these types of rather paradoxical and radically simplistic studies move us away from conserving energy at all costs that are reasonable to sustain our world.

It is the conclusion of this study that exactly in the areas where energy efficiency has increased has energy consumption increased, even doubled. Well, that is because we have focused on the areas of greatest energy consumption. But what the study did not find or attempt to conclude is how much energy would have been consumed without these energy efficiency measures. This makes this, in my mind, a bit of a flawed analysis, or at least one worth questioning what the initial premise was.

In conclusion, I do not believe these types of reports are of benefit except to conclude that 'more can be done,' and at this piont, I would say, this writer could have put more of his effort into saving his own energy and the energy of his publisher.

Study: Energy efficiency leads to greater consumption

Filed from Houston 12/27/2007 11:08:48 PM GMT



Solar_Cell

USA: A new report released last month by CIBC World Markets, "The Efficiency Paradox," outlines how energy efficiency initiatives and regulations often end up increasing consumption. CIBC World Markets Chief Economist and Chief Strategist Jeff Rubin, author of the report, found an "efficiency paradox" in which consumers have been able to use the cost savings generated by more efficient products to invest in additional energy consuming products.


Rubin notes, "While seemingly perverse, improvements in energy efficiency result in more of the good being consumed - not less."

The Official Google Blog - Insights from Googlers into our products, technology and the Google culture
This is more from Google on Climate Savers Initiative, in time for the holidays. Google has always been very mindful of the holidays, and has blogged on this initiative many times if I recall. I bet you didn't know PCs use energy even when they are idle. 100-200 watts, that is! Imagine everyone in the country turning off their computers, and what that would do for the environment.





Save some energy over the holidays

12/22/2007 07:20:00 AM



Here's a suggestion for everyone to save energy over the holidays (and at other times!): turn off your computer and monitor or put them into "sleep" mode when you're not using them.

Why? The typical desktop PC uses 100-200 watts even when it's idle. That's the equivalent of 1-2 bright incandescent (read: inefficient) light bulbs. (Note: new PCs that comply with the latest Energy Star specifications consume less than 50-60 watts when idle.)

You wouldn't leave your car running for hours when it's just sitting there. Most of us wouldn't leave a bright light bulb burning for hours when no one is nearby to need the light. So why leave your computer on?

If you're leaving your office for the holidays, turn off your PC. If it consumes 100 watts, that will save 2.4 kWh/day, or over 25 kWh for the next 11 days through January 1st. In California, that will stop about 40 kg of CO2 from being put into the air, and save about $2.50. For every 1 million people who do this, that will stop 40,000 tonnes (metric tons) of CO2 from being emitted, and save $2.5 million. In many areas, it will reduce emissions even further, and save even more money.

The same issue applies at home: turn off your computer or put it to sleep when you're not using it. The automatic power management settings on most computers will put them to sleep automatically after a specified idle period.

If you use a screensaver, set it to "blank" the screen and put the monitor in sleep mode after a few minutes. Screensavers don't have any benefit (other than being nice to look at) on modern displays, and they consume as much or more energy as just about anything else you could ask your computer to do.

You might be thinking, "why now?" This isn't just an issue for the holidays, but this is a good time to remind people. In general, when you're not using your computer, turn it off or put it to sleep. Most computers can go to sleep quickly, and then wake up with all your work exactly as it was when you put it to sleep -- so there's no downside.

If you want to do even more to save energy with your computers and to help the entire IT industry move to higher energy efficiency, check out the Climate Savers Computing Initiative, which we co-founded last June to create a positive "virtuous circle" between the supply of and demand for energy-efficient computers. More than 140 companies, universities, governments, and nonprofits, along with thousands of individuals, have pledged to buy energy-efficient computers and to use automatic power management tools to save energy. As more people make the same commitments, the volume of energy-efficient computers sold will increase, and the very modest price premium they demand today should drop.

Have a great holiday season!
Permalink

Dec 23, 2007

Cool experiment on recycling below, however what we really need is real recycling, not downcycling.


ecycl-o-sort: not a part of foreplay, but still very important

Even casual fans of Jemaine Clement could appreciate the Recycl-o-sort -- after all, it's hard to deny the vitalness of sorting out the recycling. In that spirit, a team of MIT students concocted a prototype that automatically sifts through recyclables and deposits them into the appropriate bin depending on makeup. The sun-powered device is currently being tested in Boston's Codman Square area as part of Family, Inc.'s recycling awareness campaign, and it reportedly uses a "turntable" to pass each item through a trio of sensors to determine whether it's aluminum, plastic, glass or just plain rubbish. Call us crazy, but this whole thing just brings back memories of that team building exercise we did back in '99.

[Via Core77]

Dec 20, 2007

More on CFLS and Dimmer Switches.



3. Can I use a compact fluorescent light bulb with a dimmer switch?

To use a compact fluorescent bulb on a dimmer switch, you must buy a bulb that's specifically made to work with dimmers (check the package). GE makes a dimming compact fluorescent light bulb (called the GE Longlife Plus Soft White Energy Saving Bulb) that is specially designed for use with dimming switches. We don't recommend using regular compact fluorescent bulbs with dimming switches, since this can shorten bulb life. (Using a regular compact fluorescent bulb with a dimmer will also nullify the bulb's warranty.)



http://www.gelighting.com/na/business_lighting/faqs/cfl.htm#3

Here are more FAQs on CFLs that I cut and paste from GE's site (most likely a very trusted source!)

1. Can I use a compact fluorescent light bulb with an electronic timer or photocell (AKA electric eye)?

2. Can I use a compact fluorescent light bulb in an enclosed light fixture?

3. Can I use a compact fluorescent light bulb with a dimmer switch?

4. Can I use a CFL in applications where I will be turning the lights on/off frequently?

5. Can I use a CFL in applications involving vibration such as a ceiling fan or garage door opener?

6. What should I do if I break a CFL bulb?

7. Why does the color of CFLs seem different at start-up?

8. Do light bulbs (such as fluorescent and compact fluorescent bulbs) give off hazardous amounts of ultraviolet (UV) light?

9. How does a compact fluorescent light bulb work?

10. What compact fluorescent light bulb do I buy to replace a 60-, 75-, 100- or 150-watt regular bulb?

11. How much heat (or infrared radiation) is emitted by regular, halogen, and compact fluorescent light bulbs?

12. What is Energy Star® and why are many compact fluorescent light bulbs Energy Star labeled?

13. How can I get lighting product catalogs and sell sheets?

What to Do if a Fluorescent Light Bulb Breaks (According to EPA)

Caught this link on Boingboing.net. CFLs and fluorescent bulbs are energy efficient but they have to be handled with care. This is one of those balancing acts our planet demands of us, which is why we need to look at the big picture. We save on one thing, and what are the environmental implications. Put another way, if we save on the environment by disposing of things in a responsible way, what energy impact is that?

In any case, it's important to be educated, and I encourage you to continue to use the new energy efficient light bulbs and LEDs whenever possible.

Here is what you do if your fluorescents break in your house. Remember - they contain trace amounts of mercury so handle with care. They also contain massive amounts of 'energy savings' which is absolutely critical going forward. Make sure to screw them in every light bulb you can. I heard they don't work on dimmer switches, so I'm going to look into that and report back.


EPA is continually reviewing its clean-up and disposal recommendations for CFLs to ensure that the Agency presents the most up-to-date information for consumers and businesses.

Fluorescent light bulbs contain a very small amount of mercury sealed within the glass tubing. EPA recommends the following clean-up and disposal guidelines:

  1. Open a window and leave the room for 15 minutes or more.

  2. Carefully scoop up the fragments and powder with stiff paper or cardboard and place them in a sealed plastic bag.

    1. Use disposable rubber gloves, if available (i.e., do not use bare hands). Wipe the area clean with damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes and place them in the plastic bag.

    2. Do not use a vacuum or broom to clean up the broken bulb on hard surfaces.

  3. Place all cleanup materials in a second sealed plastic bag.

    1. Place the first bag in a second sealed plastic bag and put it in the outdoor trash container or in another outdoor protected area for the next normal trash disposal.
      Note: Some states prohibit such trash disposal and require that broken and unbroken lamps be taken to a local recycling center.

    2. Wash your hands after disposing of the bag.

  4. If a fluorescent bulb breaks on a rug or carpet:

    1. First, remove all materials you can without using a vacuum cleaner, following the steps above. Sticky tape (such as duct tape) can be used to pick up small pieces and powder.

    2. If vacuuming is needed after all visible materials are removed, vacuum the area where the bulb was broken, remove the vacuum bag (or empty and wipe the canister) and put the bag or vacuum debris in two sealed plastic bags in the outdoor trash or protected outdoor location for normal disposal.

Dec 19, 2007

First CO2-free coal power plant announced


This looks interesting, though I'm skeptical when it says CO2 free when it looks like the CO2 is really being captured. Not sure that's the right wording.

  • Story Highlights
  • Coalition wants to siphon off CO2 and pump it into underground reservoirs
  • Mattoon, Illinois, will host the first full-scale power plant using this technology
  • The plant won't actually burn coal but gasify it
  • The system yields several gases which are processed into hydrogen
  • Next Article in Technology »
By Sean Captain
Decrease font Decrease font
Enlarge font Enlarge font
PopSci.com

(PopSci.com) -- Coal is almost the perfect fuel. It's cheap and absurdly abundant -- especially in the United States, which has the world's larges reserves. There's just that tiny problem of massive climate-altering carbon dioxide emissions. Or is there?

The FutureGen Alliance -- a coalition of private power companies and the U.S. Department of Energy -- thinks it can make power cleanly by siphoning off the carbon dioxide and pumping it into underground reservoirs. The Alliance spent the past year evaluating four locations around the country that applied to host the first full-scale power plant using the technology; and today it chose Mattoon, Illinois as the winner.

Unlike a regular coal power plant, the FutureGen plant won't actually burn coal but gasify it by exposing powdered coal to oxygen in a high-pressure heated chamber.

The system yields several gases which are processed into hydrogen, which burns in a turbine to produce electricity, and carbon-dioxide, which is pumped into deep geologic formations that researchers expect to hold the gas indefinitely.

Proponents say that gasification is easier than capturing CO2 from a regular power plant because it produces it produces a smaller volume of exhaust and it easily traps most other pollutants from coal, such as Mercury. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend

Copyright © 2007 Popular Science

Dec 18, 2007

Update on international climate negotiations

12/17/2007 09:05:00 AM



The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change reached agreement in Bali on Saturday on a roadmap to reach a new international climate change agreement. Several Google.org team members attended and have shared their thoughts on some of the themes of the conference: putting the Bali roadmap in context, climate change and economic development, local government actions, and an introduction to the negotiations. We hope you find these writeups informative.
Permalink

Dec 17, 2007

As I sit at my desk wondering what I'm going to blog on today, I am drinking out of a mug today that says:

Renewable Energy:
4.5 Billion Years without an Outage.


Two points to bring up from this.
1. Mugs are great marketing tools because the message sits on your desk for years.
2. That is funny, and also true.

Dec 14, 2007

Gore makes Nashville home more 'green'

Dec 14, 2007 CNN
NASHVILLE, Tennessee (AP) -- Al Gore, who was criticized for high electric bills at his Tennessee mansion, has completed a host of improvements to make the home more energy efficient, and a building-industry group has praised the house as one of the nation's most environmentally friendly.

Al Gore recently won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work on global climate change.

The former vice president has installed solar panels, a rainwater-collection system and geothermal heating. He also replaced all incandescent lights with compact fluorescent or light-emitting diode bulbs -- even on his Christmas tree.

"Short of tearing it down and staring anew, I don't know how it could have been rated any higher," said Kim Shinn of the U.S. Green Building Council, which gave the house its second-highest rating for sustainable design.

Gore's improvements cut the home's summer electrical consumption by 11 percent compared with a year ago, according to utility records reviewed by The Associated Press. Most Nashville homes used 20 percent to 30 percent more electricity during the same period because of a record heat wave.

Shinn said Gore's renovations are impressive because his home, which is more than 80 years old, had to meet the same rigorous standards as new construction.

"One of the things that is tremendously powerful about what the Gores have done is demonstrate that you can take a home that was a dog, an absolute energy pig, and do things to correct that," Shinn said.

Al Gore bio

* Born March 31, 1948

* Father Albert Gore Sr. was a U.S. senator from Tennessee from 1953 to 1971

* Graduated from Harvard University with honors in 1969

* Enlisted in U.S. Army and served in Vietnam War as a reporter

* Was a U.S. congressman from 1977 to 1985 and U.S. senator from Tennessee from 1985 to 1992

* Elected as vice president under President Clinton in 1992

* Unsuccessfully ran for president in 2000

* Married to Tipper Gore; four children and two grandchildren

Sources: Alliance for Climate Protection, CNN

Gore bought the mansion in the Nashville suburb of Belle Meade in 2002 for $2.3 million. It houses his offices and those of his wife, Tipper, as well as a commercial kitchen for formal events.

Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider declined to say how much the couple spent on the improvements.

"The Gores decided to take a series of steps over time that might be logistically or financially out of reach for many Americans," she said. "But they were fortunate enough to have the ability to do so.

"But everyone can get started, whether it's changing light bulbs or purchasing green power."

In February, a conservative think tank criticized Gore for using an average of 16,000 kilowatt hours a month for an average monthly bill of $1,206 in 2006. The typical Nashville home uses about 1,300 kilowatt hours a month.

Gore has said the criticism was unfair because the 10,000-square-foot mansion was undergoing extensive remodeling. He said this week that "global warming denier" groups were trying to discredit him because they don't like the attention he has given to climate change.

"You're going to have people try to attack the messenger in order to get at the message. They have not been able to succeed," Gore told CNN from Norway, where he picked up the Nobel Peace Prize for his environmental work.

"The only way to solve this crisis is for individuals to make changes in their own lives," he said.

The Green Building Council's certification program has four levels, with platinum being the highest followed by gold. Gore's home was one of 14 to earn gold status and the only Tennessee home to earn any certification.

Electricity usage at the home remains well above regional averages, but Gore's power consumption decreased by 6,890 kilowatt hours, or 11 percent, between June and August, despite the heat wave.

Gore's electric use increased again after he had to take his solar panels off-line in August so his new geothermal system could be integrated into the system. But his natural gas use has dropped 93 percent in the three months since the geothermal pump was activated.

Impact Your World

* See how you can make a difference

When the Gores' heated pool is hooked up to the system later this month, their energy use is expected to decline more, his spokeswoman said.

Gore has also said he invests in renewable energy such as solar and wind power to balance 100 percent of his electricity usage.

Stephen Smith, executive director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, said the size of Gore's house limits how much he can cut his energy consumption.

"We all need to evaluate what we legitimately need in square footage," he said.

Still, another owner of the same house likely would not have been as dedicated as Gore to reducing energy consumption, said Smith, who also serves on the advisory committee for Gore's Alliance for Climate Protection.

"I promise you the energy use would be as high, if not higher," he said. E-mail to a friend

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

All About Global Climate Change • Al Gore




More farmers seeing wind as cash crop

Dec 14, 2007 Chicago Tribune

By Tim Jones

Dec. 14, 2007 (McClatchy-Tribune News Service delivered by Newstex) -- BAD AXE, Mich. -- At a time when most people choose to avoid the harsh winter winds that roar past corn stubble and whip up billowing dust clouds over table-flat fields, farmers in the Thumb of Michigan now talk about catching the wind and all the money that comes with it.

Michigan's first commercial wind farm -- a collection of 32 towering turbines that conjure visions of H.G. Wells' "The War of the Worlds" -- is scheduled to begin operating in a few weeks, spurring for some a near-gold rush mentality in this sparsely populated area.

Thousands of dollars in a guaranteed annual harvest come with each windmill placed on a farmer's land, and that lure has gone a long way toward interrupting the horizontal sameness of vast corn and bean fields.

"I can't wait till they get going," said Bob Webber, who turned over easement rights to a portion of his property in Huron County for a proposed second wind farm, with 42 turbines.

"I'm looking forward to seeing a lot more of them. ... This would be a big deal for me," Webber said.

For generations the tallest structures in the agricultural Midwest have been grain elevators, but the rapid growth of the wind-power industry is altering the landscape in states such as Iowa, which has about 960 turbines, and Minnesota, which has about 860 turbines, according to the American Wind Energy Association, a trade group.

Iowa and Minnesota rank third and fifth, respectively, in annual electrical power generated by wind (Illinois ranks 11th), and a utility executive in Detroit said he envisions the tip of Michigan's Thumb planted with more than 1,000 wind turbines. The 32 Michigan turbines reach 400 feet from the base to the tip of the rotor blade and are projected to provide electricity to more than 15,000 homes served by Wolverine Power Cooperative, in western and northern Michigan.

Because of consistent wind speeds that buffet the Thumb, a region that juts into Lake Huron and Saginaw Bay, "Huron County is the sweet spot," said Trevor Lauer, vice president of retail marketing for DTE Energy Co. (NYSE:DTE) The Detroit-based electric utility has bought easement rights to 30,000 acres in the county, taking advantage of good winds and what appears to be a path of least citizen resistance.

"Agricultural land and wind play together very well," said Lauer, adding that wind power has "reached a tipping point. It's no longer a question of if but when, and to what extent."

Last month TPI Composites announced it will open a factory in Newton, Iowa, to build wind turbine blades. That will be the fifth turbine parts manufacturer that has set up operations in Iowa in the past two years, driven by a soaring national demand for turbines. During the first nine months of this year, Texas, the nation's leader in wind energy, installed nearly 600 turbines. An additional 136 were scheduled to be installed by the end of the year.

"The world of wind has been substantially reshaped in the past three or four years," said Randall Swisher, executive director of the American Wind Energy Association. "There's a rush of capital into it."

There is, of course, a wide chasm separating the dream of large-scale alternative power and the actual implementation of it. Energy transmission problems and political obstacles -- namely resistance from people who find the turbines ugly or a Cuisinart-like threat to birds -- loom large. Wind power accounts for a mere 1 percent of energy generation nationwide. And turbine proposals in resort and seaside areas such as Cape Cod have provoked loud protests. Federal tax credits are a vital lifeline to the industry.

But the investment in wind power is taking root in sparsely populated areas of the Midwest and across the country, due in large part to state mandates forcing utilities to generate a certain percentage of their electricity -- say, 10 to 20 percent -- from alternative sources. At least two other wind power ventures are under consideration in Huron County. Michigan's entry into wind power is notable because this state, by virtue of its long marriage to the automobile industry, is perhaps the ultimate fossil fuel state.

State officials say the wind farm due to open around Jan. 1 will save Michigan residents $4 billion on power generation over the next 20 years.

"This makes a statement very clearly that we think renewables (energy) will be part of the future," said Craig Borr, executive vice president at Wolverine.

The more immediate beneficiaries of the gradual move to wind power are people like Bob Krohn, who owns about 1,500 acres near the town of Pigeon. Krohn spends most of his early mornings with longtime friends, downing coffee at a round Formica table at the Dutch Kettle, a keep-your-hat-on restaurant where the most expensive item on the menu is $5.85. The three turbines on Krohn's property will earn him $18,000 to $30,000 a year, he said.

"We're so used to seeing them now," said Krohn, whose turbines are among the 32 in the $90 million project developed by John Deere Wind Energy.

On a recent frigid night in Bad Axe, DTE officials invited 250 people to a hotel for a prime-rib and open-bar schmooze designed to sell the virtues of wind power. In Huron County, where the median family income of $42,400 is 15 percent below the national average, the utility is preaching to a sizable choir.

Mary Jahr, a waitress at the Dutch Kettle, said if she and her husband got windmills on their 160 acres in the western part of the county, "I might be able to quit working."

The support, however, is not unanimous. In the northernmost part of the county, along the shore of Lake Huron, critics have raised objections about the windmills' potential harm to birds and property values. This is a lake resort area, popular in the summertime. It's an eagle nesting site and part of the migratory path of thousands of tundra swans.

"Our township is unique because it is resort and agricultural," said Louis Colletta, the planning commission chairman for Lake Township.

The township last month rejected DTE's request to set up testing towers to measure the speed and consistency of the wind. Colletta said there are many questions to be answered about the wisdom to installing windmills, "and we can't go at it too fast." In that regard, Huron County is a microcosm of the national debate.

Russell Lundberg, director of the Huron County Building and Zoning Department, said there is growing acceptance of wind power in the county. People see it as a way of preserving farmland and the historical heritage of the region and, at the same time, embracing new technology.

"What would I rather have in my back yard? A subdivision of homes or a coal-burning power plant?" Lundberg asked. "We're going to hear both sides on this issue, but there will be more wind farms here, no question about it."

------

(c) 2007, Chicago Tribune.

Visit the Chicago Tribune on the Internet at http://www.chicagotribune.com/

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

Dec 13, 2007

EU Threatens to Boycott US Climate Talks


AP Photo
AP Photo/Dita Alangkara
Watch Related Video

Al Gore: Political Will Is a Renewable Resource


Buy AP Photo Reprints

Interactive Poll
Do you IM?

BALI, Indonesia (AP) -- European nations threatened Thursday to boycott U.S.-sponsored climate talks next month unless the Bush administration compromises and agrees to a "road map" for reducing greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.

With the U.N. climate conference in its final hours, Nobel laureate Al Gore said the United States was "principally responsible" for blocking progress here toward an agreement on launching negotiations to replace the Kyoto Protocol when it expires in 2012.

But the former vice president urged delegations to reach the required unanimous agreement before the conference's end on Friday, even if it meant putting aside goals for emissions cuts.

"You can do one of two things here," Gore said. "You can feel anger and frustration and direct it at the United States of America, or you can make a second choice. You can decide to move forward and do all of the difficult work that needs to be done."

The United States, Japan, Russia and several other governments refused to accept language in a draft document suggesting rich nations consider cutting emissions 25 percent to 40 percent by 2020, saying specific targets would limit the scope of future talks.

European nations and others argued that numerical goals are essential reference points in efforts to curb global warming.

All sides agree it is impossible to deal with climate change unless the United States is involved. It is the world's leading emitter of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases and the only major industrial country that did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol.

President Bush views his own climate talks as the main vehicle for determining action by the U.S. - and, he hopes, by others. The Jan. 30-31 session in Honolulu is a continuation of September talks at the White House called the Major Economies Meeting on Energy Security and Climate Change.

The U.S. has invited 16 major economies, including European countries, Japan, China and India, to discuss a program of what are expected to be nationally determined, voluntary cutbacks in greenhouse gas emissions.

But the EU warned it would stay away unless Washington drops its opposition to mandatory cuts.

"No result in Bali means no Major Economies Meeting," said Sigmar Gabriel, the top EU environment official. "This is the clear position of the EU. I do not know what we should talk about if there is no target."

The main goal in Bali is to kick-start two years of intense dialogue about how to slow global warming and head off scientific predictions of rising sea levels, worsening floods and droughts, and losing plant and animal species.

Yvo de Boer, the U.N. climate chief, said he worried the U.S.-EU deadlock could derail any consensus in Bali on how to proceed.

"I'm very concerned about the pace of things," he said. "If we don't get wording on the future, then the whole house of cards falls to pieces."

The U.S. delegation said that while it continued to reject inclusion of specific emission cut targets, it hoped eventually to reach an agreement that would be "environmentally effective" and "economically sustainable."

"We don't have to resolve all these issues ... here in Bali," said Undersecretary of State Paula Dobriansky, head of the American delegation.

Also Thursday, U.N. spokeswoman Marie Okabe said Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is remaining in Bali longer than scheduled because of the "very critical phase of the negotiating process" at the climate conference.

Ban has spoken to Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice a number of times on the issue, and would be holding round-the clock talks with all countries there, including the U.S., Okabe said.

The Kyoto Protocol requires 37 industrial nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions an average 5 percent below 1990 levels by the pact's expiration in 2012. Australia was the latest industrial country to ratify the pact, soon after Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was elected.

Bush rejected the Kyoto pact on the grounds it would harm the U.S. economy and its provisions did not apply to poorer but fast-developing nations such as China and India, whose emission levels are growing fast.

China and India have called on the West to take the lead in cutting emissions and insist they will not agree to any targets that would slow the pace of development. But neither publicly says whether they would support emission targets.

Appearing at the U.N. conference four days after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for his work on alerting people to the threat from rising temperatures, Gore challenged delegates packing a meeting hall to forge an agreement with an eye on history.

"Instead of shaking our heads at the difficulty of this path and saying this is impossible, how can we do this, we ought to feel a sense of joy that we have work that is worth doing that is so important to the future of human kind," he said.

"You have everything that you need, we have everything we need except political will. But political will is a renewable resource."

Gore criticized the United States as "principally responsible for obstructing progress" in Bali, raising loud cheers from the delegates. But he also urged them to reach an agreement, which he said a future U.S. administration would likely support.

"Over the next two years, the United States is going to be somewhere it is not now," he said, noting that all Democratic and several Republican presidential candidates support mandatory emission cuts.

"I must tell you candidly that I can not promise that the person who is elected will have the position I expect they will have, but I can tell you I believe it is quite likely," Gore said.

Kristen Hellmer, a member of the U.S. delegation, said Gore's assertions were untrue.

"The U.S. is being open and working very constructively with the other countries that are here," she said. "We are rolling our sleeves up and really working to come up with a global post-2012 framework."

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

Purchase this AP story for reprint.

How Much Greenhouse Gas Does California Swine Produce?

By Alexis Madrigal EmailDecember 12, 2007 | 8:55:00 AMCategories: Climate, Dataset

Three_little_pigsA question we often find ourselves asking is just how much raising swine in the great state of California contributes to global warming. Now, with help from the data released by the Air Resources Board, I can definitively tell you that raising swine in this state generated 0.116149133041726 million metric tons of greenhouse gases, the equivalent of burning 1.3 million gallons of gasoline.

The US is balking at capping its greenhouse gas emissions below 1990 levels, but here in California, a law known as AB 32 has done just that. Implementing the policy required that the state do a complete inventory of its GHG emissions from 1990 on, so it could actually determine what the cap should be. That meant calculating the emissions from hundreds of sources from dairy cows to jet fuel to passenger cars.

Here at Wired Science, we figure that you are nerds like us who love data, so we made the ARB spreadsheet a little friendlier, calculated gallons of gas equivalents out of the metric tons of greenhouse gases, and have posted the Excel doc for 2004 in glorious detail here: California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Breakdown. Take a look and find your very own favorite greenhouse gas emissions category.

UPDATE (5:50PM): By popular demand, here's a Google doc of the sheet.

There's also a serious side to seeing this data. My hope is that our readers will get an idea of where, exactly, greenhouse gas emissions are coming from because it's not all passenger cars and factories. Natural gas for heating, oil refining, dairy cows, nitrogen in fertilizer, and dozens of other sources contribute to the greenhouse gases that are causing climate change.

This is discouraging stuff. As this spreadsheet makes clear, many parts of our modern processes are dirty, generating carbon dioxide(CO2), methane(CH4), and nitrous oxide(N2O). But it's also heartening to see this big huge problem -- global warming! -- broken down into categories in a spreadsheet. We can look, line-by-line, at major areas where we can reduce our emissions through efficiency and innovation.

Often, when we think about energy efficiency in a category like homes, we think about its operating efficiency, but it takes a lot of energy (and therefore emissions) to create the house in the first place.

Take manufacturing cement, the 33rd most polluting activity in California. A company called CalStar announced they got $3.4 million last month from Foundation Capital to commercialize their eco-friendly cement. They are a long way from producing enough cement to fulfill demand, but it's a good step towards redesigning the building material system.

Pour the foundation with CalStar cement and then use Serious Materials EcoRock for drywall, and you start to see an ecosystem developing that will allow you to build a green house that generates a lot less greenhouse gases.

Carbon gases: Green Exchange takes root soon
Dec 13, 2007 USA Today
Paul Davidson, USA TODAY

A star-studded cast of energy and environmental brokers and investors is launching a new exchange for trading credits that offset the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming.

The Green Exchange is expected to sharply expand the fast-growing market for trading greenhouse gas and renewable energy credits, says Peter Fusaro, chairman of consulting firm Global Change Associates.

The exchange will start in the first quarter. Its partners are Nymex Holdings, parent company of the New York Mercantile Exchange, the world's largest energy exchange; Evolution Markets, the biggest broker of environmental credits; and investment banks including Morgan Stanley , JPMorgan , Credit Suisse and Merrill Lynch .

"You have the largest energy exchange partnering with the largest environmental brokers," Fusaro says.

Today, countries that ratified the Kyoto treaty have agreed to cut their emissions of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide. European countries have adopted a cap-and-trade system that limits carbon emissions by utilities and industries, with companies that exceed their cap buying allowances from those that fall under their limits. Many of the trades take place on the European Climate Exchange.

But the United States has not joined the Kyoto treaty, so the market for trading carbon credits is voluntary. For example, a corporation can offset the greenhouse gases it produces by purchasing carbon credits, or offsets. Such credits can help subsidize the planting of a forest, for example, which removes carbon from the atmosphere.

Many banks and other investors are eager to invest in carbon offsets because Congress is expected to impose a cap-and-trade system in the USA after the 2008 election. That's expected to boost the price of U.S. credits from $2 to $5 per ton of carbon to $30 to $50 a ton.

Today, trades are typically completed on the Chicago Climate Exchange or by brokers, such as Evolution Markets. The Chicago exchange, however, handles a relatively small volume for traders, who must be members, and no third party guarantees their quality, Fusaro says. Evolution, meanwhile, cannot assure the credit-worthiness of buyers and sellers, says company President and CEO Andrew Ertel.

The Green Exchange will provide a clearinghouse that alleviates both concerns. It also will handle a much wider array of products, including European allowances, voluntary U.S. pollution offsets and renewable energy credits, which help subsidize wind farms or solar plants.

The exchange will list products on the vast CME Group Globex computer platform, which is used by banks and institutions to trade agricultural and energy products, allowing them to easily participate in the new exchange.

Uniting big energy brokers "will create more emission reductions at lower prices," Ertel says.

The U.S. market for voluntary credits is $100 million a year, but the worldwide market for carbon allowances is about $60 billion.

Conversation guidelines: USA TODAY welcomes your thoughts, stories and information related to this article. Please stay on topic and be respectful of others. Keep the conversation appropriate for interested readers across the map.

2. Summary: The Clean Renewable Energy and Conservation Tax Act of 2007
Nov 12, 2007 Senate Finance Committee
The Clean Renewable Energy and Conservation Tax Act of 2007

I. Clean Renewable Energy Incentives

Renewable Energy

Extension and modification of Section 45. The proposal extends the placed-in-service date for two years (through December 31, 2010) for qualifying facilities: wind, closed-loop biomass; open-loop biomass; geothermal; small irrigation hydro; landfill gas; and trash combustion facilities. Also modifies the market value test for refined coal while increasing its emissions requirements for sulfur dioxide and mercury. The proposal also adds tidal energy as a qualifying resource and eliminates the third party sale rule for closed and open-loop biomass facilities. The proposal is estimated to cost $6.22 billion over ten years.

Long-term extension and modification of solar energy and fuel cell investment tax credit. The bill extends the 30% investment tax credit for solar energy property and qualified fuel cell property and the 10% investment tax credit for microturbines for eight years (through the end of 2016). It also increases the $500 per half kilowatt of capacity cap for qualified fuel cells to $1,500 per half kilowatt of capacity. The bill removes an existing limitation that prevents public utilities from claiming the investment tax credit. The bill would also provide a new 10% investment tax credit for combined heat and power systems. The bill also allows these credits to be used to offset alternative minimum tax (AMT). This proposal is estimated to cost $602 million over 10 years.

Long-term extension and modification of the residential energy-efficient property credit. The bill would extend the credit for residential solar property for six years (through the end of 2014). The bill would also increase the annual credit cap (currently capped at $2,000) to $4,000. The bill would include residential small wind equipment as property qualifying for this credit. The bill also allows the credit to be used to offset alternative minimum tax (AMT). This proposal is estimated to cost approximately $317 million over ten years.

Sales of electric transmission property. The bill extends the present-law deferral of gain on sales of transmission property by vertically integrated electric utilities to FERC-approved independent transmission companies. Rather than recognizing the full amount of gain in the year of sale, this provision allows gain on such sales to be recognized ratably over an 8-year period. The rule applies to sales before January 1, 2010. This proposal is revenue neutral over 10 years.

Transmission Bonds. The bill creates a new category of tax exempt bonds for electric transmission facilities. The bonds fall within the regular state private activity bond cap limitations. This proposal is estimated to cost $96 million over 10 years.

New Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (“CREBs”). The bill authorizes $2 billion of new clean renewable energy bonds to finance facilities that generate electricity from the following resources: wind; closed-loop biomass; open-loop biomass; geothermal; small irrigation; hydropower; landfill gas; marine renewable; and trash combustion facilities. This $2 billion authorization will be subdivided into thirds: 1/3 will be available for qualifying projects of State/local/tribal governments; 1/3 for qualifying projects of public power providers; and 1/3 for qualifying projects of electric cooperatives. This proposal is estimated to cost $550 million over 10 years.

Carbon Mitigation and Coal

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) demonstration projects. The bill would provide $2 billion of tax credits for the creation of advanced coal electricity projects and certain coal gasification projects that demonstrate the greatest potential for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. Of these $2 billion of incentives, $1.5 billion would be awarded to advanced coal electricity projects and $500 million would be awarded to certain coal gasification projects. These tax credits would be awarded by Treasury through an application process, with the applicants that demonstrate the greatest carbon capture and sequestration percentage of total CO2 emissions receiving the highest priority. Applications will not be considered unless applicants can demonstrate that either their advanced coal electricity project would capture and sequester at least 65% of the facility’s carbon dioxide emissions or that their coal gasification project would capture and sequester at least 75% of the facility’s carbon dioxide emissions. Once these credits are awarded, recipients that fail to meet these minimum levels of carbon capture and sequestration would forfeit their tax credits. This proposal is estimated to cost $1.794 billion over 10 years.

Accelerated depreciation for CO2 pipelines. In order to facilitate the creation of infrastructure to transport captured CO2 to suitable sequestration sites, the bill would allow taxpayers to write-off the cost of CO2 pipelines that are installed after the date of enactment and before January 1, 2011 using accelerated depreciation over a seven-year period (as opposed to the 15-year period allowed under current law). This proposal is estimated to cost $50 million over 10 years.

Solvency for the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. The bill would enact the President’s proposal to bring the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund out of debt. Under current law, an excise tax is imposed on coal at a rate of $1.10 per ton for coal from underground mines and $0.55 per ton for coal from surface mines (aggregate tax per ton capped at 4.4 percent of the amount sold by the producer). Receipts from this tax are deposited in the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund, which is used to pay compensation, medical and survivor benefits to eligible miners and their survivors and to cover costs of program administration. The Trust Fund is permitted to borrow from the general fund any amounts necessary to make authorized expenditures if excise tax receipts do not provide sufficient funding. Reduced rates of excise tax apply after the earlier of December 31, 2013 or the date on which the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund has repaid, with interest, all amounts borrowed from the general fund of the Treasury. The President’s Budget proposes that the current excise tax rate should continue to apply beyond 2013 until all amounts borrowed from the general fund of the Treasury have been repaid with interest. After repayment, the reduced excise tax rates of $0.50 per ton for coal from underground mines and $0.25 per ton for coal from surface mines would apply (aggregate tax per ton capped at 2 percent of the amount sold by the producer). The bill would enact the President’s proposal (with a reduced rate after 2017). This proposal is estimated to raise $966 million over 10 years.

Refund of certain coal excise taxes unconstitutionally collected from exporters. The Courts have determined that the Export Clause of the U.S. Constitution applies to the excise tax on exported coal and, therefore, such taxes are subject to a claim for refund. The bill would create a new procedure under which certain coal producers and exporters may claim a refund of these excise taxes that were imposed on coal exported from the United States. Under this procedure, coal producers or exporters that exported coal during the period beginning on or after October 1, 1990 and ending on or before the date of enactment of the bill, may obtain a refund (plus interest) from the Treasury of excise taxes paid on such exported coal and any interest accrued from the date of overpayment. This proposal is estimated to cost $120 million over 10 years.

Carbon audit of the tax code. The bill directs the Secretary of the Treasury to request that the National Academy of Sciences undertake a comprehensive review of the tax code to identify the types of specific tax provisions that have the largest effects on carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions and to estimate the magnitude of those effects. This proposal has no revenue effect.

II. Transportation and Domestic Fuel Security

Biofuels

Cellulosic alcohol production credit. The bill creates a new production tax credit for cellulosic alcohol produced for use as a fuel. The amount of this credit is equal to the difference between $1.01 per gallon and the per gallon ethanol blender tax credit (currently 51 cents per gallon). For example, this credit would be $1.01 per gallon if the ethanol blender credit were to expire and would be 55 cents per gallon if the ethanol blender credit were reduced to 46 cents under a different provision in this bill. The credit may only be claimed on up to 60 million gallons per taxpayer. This credit would be available through the end of 2013. This proposal is estimated to cost $482 million over 10 years.

Expansion of allowance for property to produce cellulosic alcohol. Under current law, taxpayers are allowed to immediately write off 50% of the cost of facilities that produce cellulosic ethanol if such facilities are placed in service before January 1, 2013. Consistent with other provisions in the bill that seek to be technology neutral, the bill would allow this write off to be available for the production of other cellulosic alcohols in addition to cellulosic ethanol. This proposal is estimated to cost $1 million over 10 years.

Coordination of ethanol blender credit with the renewable fuels standard (RFS). The bill ensures that the ethanol blender credit takes into account the additional incentive for the use of ethanol that the renewable fuel standard (RFS) provides. Upon the production or importation of 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol in any calendar year, the 51 cent ethanol credit will be reduced to 46 cents per gallon. This proposal is estimated to raise $854 million over 10 years.

Extension of biodiesel production tax credit; extension and modification of renewable diesel tax credit. The bill extends for two years (through December 31, 2010) the $1.00 and 50 cent per gallon production tax credits for biodiesel and the small biodiesel producer credit of 10 cents per gallon. The bill also extends for two years (through December 31, 2010) the $1.00 per gallon production tax credit for diesel fuel created from biomass. The bill eliminates the requirement that the diesel fuel must be produced using a thermal depolymerization process. As a result, the credit will be available for any diesel fuel created from biomass without regard to the process used so long as the fuel is usable as a fuel in vehicles [or as aviation jet fuel]. The bill also clarifies that the $1 per gallon production credit for renewable diesel is limited to diesel fuel that is produced solely from biomass. Diesel fuel that is created by co-processing biomass with other feedstocks (e.g., petroleum) will be eligible for the 50 cent per gallon tax credit for alternative fuels. Biodiesel that is imported and sold for export will not be eligible for the credit beginning the date of enactment. This proposal is estimated to cost $216 million over 10 years.

Refinery expensing. The proposal extends for two years (through January 1, 2013) the placed-in-service requirement and the building construction contract requirement through 2009. The proposal provides 50% bonus depreciation for costs incurred for a new refinery or an existing refinery to increase total capacity by 5% or process nonconventional feedstocks at a rate equal or greater to 25% of the total throughput of the refinery. The proposal is estimated to cost $922 million over 10 years.

Comprehensive study of biofuels. The bill directs the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretaries of Agriculture and Energy and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, to request that the National Academy of Sciences produce an analysis of current scientific findings relating to the future production of biofuels and the domestic effects of a dramatic increase in the production of biofuels. This proposal has no revenue effect.

Advanced Technology Motor Vehicles

Plug-in electric drive vehicle credit. The bill establishes a new credit for each qualified plug-in electric drive vehicle placed in service during each taxable year by a taxpayer. The base amount of the credit is $3,000. If the qualified vehicle draws propulsion from a battery with at least 5 kilowatt hours of capacity, the credit amount is increased by $200, plus another $200 for each kilowatt hour of battery capacity in excess of 5 kilowatt hours up to 15 kilowatt hours. Taxpayers may claim the full amount of the allowable credit up to the end of the first calendar quarter after the quarter in which the manufacturer records 60,000 sales. The credit is reduced in following calendar quarters. The credit is available against the alternative minimum tax (AMT). This proposal is estimated to cost $1.02 billion over 10 years.

Hybrid conversion kits. The proposal creates a 20% investment tax credit, capped at $2,500, for the cost of purchasing and installing a plug-in traction battery module used to convert a hybrid vehicle to a plug-in hybrid vehicle. The proposal expires December 31, 2010. The score for this proposal is incorporated in the score of the plug-in vehicle credit, above.

Incentives for idling reduction units and advanced insulation for heavy trucks. The bill provides an exemption from the heavy vehicle excise tax for the cost of idling reduction units, such as auxiliary power units (APUs), which are designed to eliminate the need for truck engine idling (e.g., to provide heating, air conditioning, or electricity) at vehicle rest stops or other temporary parking locations. The bill would also exempt the installation of advanced insulation, which can reduce the need for energy consumption by transportation vehicles carrying refrigerated cargo. Both of these exemptions are intended to reduce carbon emissions in the transportation sector. This proposal is estimated to cost $77 million over 10 years.

Other Transportation Provisions

Restructuring of New York Liberty Zone tax credits. The bill would implement a proposal included in the President’s FY 2008 Budget to provide the City of New York and the State of New York with tax credits for expenditures made for transportation infrastructure projects connecting with the New York Liberty Zone. This proposal is estimated to cost $1.106 billion over 10 years.

Fringe benefit for bicycle commuters. The bill allows employers to provide employees that commute to work using a bicycle limited fringe benefits to offset the costs of such commuting (e.g., bicycle storage). This proposal is estimated to cost $10 million over 10 years.

III. Energy Conservation and Efficiency

Conservation Tax Credit Bonds

Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds. The bill creates a new category of tax credit bonds for green community programs and initiatives designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There is a national limitation of $3 billion which is allocated to States and municipalities. This proposal is estimated to cost $864 million over 10 years.

Qualified Forestry Conservation Bonds. The bill creates a new category of tax credit bonds for qualified forestry projects designed to acquire land subject to native fish habitat conservation plans for conservation purposes. This proposal is estimated to cost $161 million over 10 years.

Efficiency

Extension and modification of credit for energy-efficiency improvements to existing homes. The bill extends the tax credits for energy-efficient existing homes for one year (through December 31, 2008) and includes energy-efficient biomass fuel stoves as a new class of energy-efficient property eligible for a consumer tax credit of $300. This proposal is estimated to cost $402 million over 10 years.

Extension of energy-efficient commercial buildings. The bill extends the energy-efficient commercial buildings deduction for five years (through December 31, 2013). This proposal is estimated to cost $901 million over 10 years.

Modification and extension of energy-efficient appliance credit. The bill would modify the existing energy-efficient appliance credit and extend this credit for three years (through the end of 2010). This proposal is estimated to cost $344 million over 10 years.

Seven-year depreciation for smart meters. The bill would allow electric utilities to depreciate smart electric meters over a seven-year period. This proposal is estimated to cost $1.207 billion over 10 years.

IV. Other Provisions

Forestry Provisions

One-year enactment of the Timber Revitalization and Economic Enhancement (TREE) Act of 2007. The bill would enact for one-year the provisions of H.R. 1937 and S. 402 to provide a deduction for qualified timber gains and to modernize certain provisions applicable to timber real estate investment trusts (REITs). This proposal is estimated to cost $435 million over 10 years.

Other

Income averaging for Exxon Valdez litigation amounts. The bill would allow commercial fishermen and other individuals whose livelihoods were negatively impacted by the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill to average any settlement or judgement-related income that they receive in connection with pending litigation in the federal courts over three years for federal tax purposes. The bill would also allow these individuals to use these funds to make contributions to retirement accounts. This proposal is estimated to cost $215 million over 10 years.

Reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 and Payment in Lieu of Taxes. The bill would reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools program through 2011. It also adjusts the funding distribution formula to take into account historic payment levels to counties, average income levels in counties and acreage of federal land. Finally, the provision also provides for full funding for the Payment in Lieu of Taxes program for 2009. This proposal is estimated to cost $1.863 billion over 10 years.

Offset the cost of increasing the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards. The bill would offset the revenue loss associated with the increase in the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards. The cost of increasing the CAFE standards has been estimated to cost $2.114 billion over 10 years.

V. Revenue Provisions

Modification to Section 199. The proposal excludes gross receipts of major integrated oil companies derived from the sale, exchange or other disposition of oil, natural gas, or any primary product thereof from the domestic production deduction for purposes of Section 199. Primary products does not include petrochemicals, medicinal products, insecticides, and alcohols. The proposal is estimated to raise $9.433 billion over 10 years.

7-year amortization of geological and geophysical expenditures for certain major integrated oil companies. The bill increases the amortization period for geological and geophysical expenditures (G&G costs) from five years to seven years for large integrated oil companies. This proposal is estimated to raise $103 million over 10 years.

Clarification of foreign oil and gas extraction income. The tax code limits the ability of oil and gas companies to claim foreign tax credits with respect to foreign oil and gas extraction income. The bill would expand the present-law foreign oil and gas extraction income rules to apply to all foreign income from production and other activity related to the sale of oil and gas. This proposal is estimated to raise $3.187 billion over 10 years.

Revenue Provisions in the President’s FY 2008 Budget

Basis reporting by brokers on sales of stock. The bill creates mandatory cost basis reporting by brokers for transactions involving publicly traded securities. Covered securities are generally stock, debt, commodities, derivatives and other items as specified by the Treasury Secretary, which are acquired in the account or transferred to the account managed by the broker. The President’s FY 2008 Budget recommends that Congress require basis reporting on security sales. The Treasury Department explains that this proposal is necessary because “compliance increases significantly for amounts that a third party reports to the IRS. The potential for non-compliance on sales of securities is considerable under current law, because the taxpayer’s basis is not reported to the IRS. Requiring brokers to maintain records of the adjusted basis of securities sold by their customers and report this information to the IRS would increase compliance with capital gains reporting. In addition, such a requirement would provide significant simplification benefits by relieving taxpayers from the often complicated task of calculating adjusted basis to determine gain or loss on the sale of securities.” The provision applies to stock acquired after January 1, 2009 and after January 1, 2011 for all other instruments. This proposal is estimated to raise $4.106 billion over 10 years.

Extend FUTA taxes for one year. The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (“FUTA”) imposes a 6.2 percent gross tax rate on the first $7,000 paid annually by covered employers to each employee. In 1976, Congress passed a temporary surtax of 0.2 percent of taxable wages to be added to the permanent FUTA tax rate. The temporary surtax subsequently has been extended through 2007. The President’s FY 2008 Budget proposes extending the FUTA surtax. The Treasury Department states that “extending the surtax will support the continued solvency of the Federal unemployment trust funds and maintain the ability of the unemployment system to adjust to any economic downturns.” The bill would enact the President’s proposal for one year (through 2008). This provision is estimated to raise $1.446 billion over 10 years.

Modification of Penalty for Failure to File Partnership Returns. Currently, a penalty is imposed on partnerships that fail to timely file a return. The penalty amount is computed for each month the return is outstanding (not be exceed 5 months) and $50 multiplied by the number of partners. The proposal increases the maximum number of months from 5 to 12 and increases the multiple from $50 to $100. The proposal applies to returns filed after the date of enactment. This provision is estimated to raise $655 million over ten years.

Interest suspension. The Internal Revenue Code suspends the accrual of certain penalties and interest starting 22 months after the filing of the tax return if the IRS has not sent the taxpayer a notice specifically stating the taxpayer’s liability and the basis for the liability within the specified period. The proposal repeals the suspension of certain penalties and interest. This provision is estimated to raise $128 million over ten years.

Option to Treat Elective Deferrals as After Tax Contributions. Governmental section 457(b) plans may include a qualified Roth contribution program under which plan participants are permitted to designate elective deferrals that could be otherwise deferred under the plan as Roth contributions subject to the present-law rules. Such a designated Roth contribution is includible in gross income in the year of deferral and a subsequent distribution of such contribution (and the income on such contributions) is excluded from gross income if the distribution is a qualified distribution. The proposal is effective for taxable years after December 31, 2007. This provision is estimated to raise $1.035 billion over ten years.

Dec 12, 2007

Top News December 11, 2007, 5:39PM EST text size: TT

2008 Sector Outlook: Energy

Here's the third in a series examining the outlook for five sectors. S&P analysts' fundamental outlook for energy is neutral

From Standard & Poor's Equity Research

How do key S&P 500 sectors stack up for 2008? Here is the third in a series examining the outlook for five S&P sectors: the four with marketweight recommendations that have the largest market cap weightings in the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index—and the one sector with an overweight recommendation. A selection of five of S&P's top-ranked stocks in each sector is also featured. Be sure to check back in the days to follow for more sectors—and more stock picks.

More information about S&P equity research can be found at http://outlook.standardandpoors.com.

Energy

Sector Recommendation: MARKETWEIGHT

S&P 500 Market Cap Weighting: 12.1%

S&P recommends marketweighting the S&P 500 Energy sector. Year to date through Nov. 23, the S&P Energy index, which represented 12.1% of the S&P 500 index, was up 23.4%, compared to a 1.6% gain for the S&P 500. There are seven subindustry indexes in this sector, with Integrated Oil & Gas by far the largest at 61% of the sector's market value.

S&P equity analysts have a neutral fundamental outlook for the sector, reflecting an expected near-term decline in oil prices from record levels, plus below-market earnings-per-share growth estimates in 2008. S&P projects prices for the benchmark grade of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil will remain elevated, however, averaging $84.67 per barrel in 2008. S&P analysts forecast that the sector's EPS will rise 5% in 2008, vs. 15% for the broader market.

However, we believe the sector's unimpressive EPS outlook is offset by the second-lowest valuation in the S&P 500. Its price-to-earnings ratio on estimated 2008 earnings of 11.9 times is well below the 13.9 times p-e of the 500. Its p-e to projected five-year EPS growth rate (PEG) ratio of 1 times is below the broader market's 1.1 times.

Our technical opinion on the S&P 500 Energy sector is negative. The index has broken to the downside, and we think the sector could see a 10% to 15% correction over the next couple of months. This would bring energy back down to the lows of August. On a relative strength basis, energy has been in an uptrend since the beginning of the year, but may be working on a double top vs. the S&P 500.

Overall, we recommend marketweighting the energy sector, as we expect a decline in oil prices in the not-too-distant future, as well as a narrowing of refining margins and below-market 2008 EPS growth for the group. Also, we believe the technical outlook for WTI crude oil has deteriorated and think a sharp correction is possible over the coming months.

Email Subscriptions powered by FeedBlitz

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz