News-Record.com

The town of Kernersville has sought the assistance of the Center for Energy Research and Technology at N.C. A&T to reduce its energy use. Center staff will audit the energy use of the town hall, library and two fire stations, said Town Manager Curtis Swisher.

Swisher said the town will consider applying for federal stimulus funds or a performance contract to pay for the upgrades after CERT determines what needs to be done. The town also plans to build a $6 million green public works building over the next couple years and perhaps pursue LEED silver or gold certification.

I'll keep tabs on these projects to see how they pan out.

Enrollment is open for two separate summer programs at the Center for Energy Research and Technology at N.C. A&T.

The Energy Engineer Starters Program is a June camp that will teach students in middle school and high school about the use of energy and efficiency and conservation. This program is ideal for students interested in pursuing a career in engineering or environmental sciences. The cost is $200 and the camp runs from June 17-30. Details here.

An energy educators workshop will take place June 22-26 for educators who teach grades six through 12. Details here.

Details here.

Check out this interactive map by the Natural Resources Defense Council that shows existing and proposed alternative energy sites throughout the country. It shows our state's highest renewable energy potential in bio-gas. Background here.

Just got word this word from Alamance Community College:

ACC is developing a new series of courses to train students in sustainable “green” energy jobs. ACC also hopes to install “a field of solar panels on our campus that can be used for hands-on learning in the green program we develop,” said Dr. Barry Weinberg, ACC executive vice president. “This will allow us to produce energy on campus to reduce reliance on traditional energy sources.”

ACC’s proposed “Alternative/Renewable Energy” initiative addresses two areas: An Associate in Applied Science Technology degree program with transfer agreements to several campuses of the UNC system; and a technology-focused agenda that will provide a hands-on learning laboratory program. The proposed program includes electives in tsolar and wind energy; and in designing, installing, and repairing solar cells that convert sunlight into electricity, a process known as photovoltaic.

Check out a story I wrote in February about the community college system's Code Green Initiative.

The Business Committee on Energy of the N.C. Institute for Emerging Issues released today its recommendations for how to position the state as a leader in energy efficiency, renewable energy and green technology:

"The work of IEI’s Business Committee on Energy revealed a clear need for North Carolina to reconsider how its institutions are organized to meet the energy challenges and opportunities ahead. Companies consistently cite the lack of clarity about the state’s energy policy priorities as a barrier to doing business here. The state must rework its institutional arrangement to offer a coherent voice and strategy for energy policy, including the appointment of an executive level energy official in the Governor’s office, reform of the existing Energy Policy Council and redesign and relocation of the State Energy Office. Then, the state could more effectively consider how economic development incentives, renewable energy tax credits, small business assistance, and workforce education can meet companies’ needs."

Background here and here.

The U.S. Department of Energy has announced the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Bock Grant funding amounts for N.C. municipalities and counties. Greensboro will receive about $2.6 million; High Point about $1 million; Winston-Salem about $2.3 million; and Randolph County about $578,000. I'm not sure why Guilford and Forsyth counties are not on the list of recipients.

The funding:

"will support energy audits and energy efficiency retrofits in residential and commercial buildings, the development and implementation of advanced building codes and inspections, and the creation of financial incentive programs for energy efficiency improvements. Other activities eligible for use of grant funds include transportation programs that conserve energy, projects to reduce and capture methane and other greenhouse gas emissions from landfills, renewable energy installations on government buildings, energy efficient traffic signals and street lights, deployment of Combined Heat and Power and district heating and cooling systems, and others."

Refer to a previous post to get an idea of what might happen with the money in Greensboro.

Update (April 10): CERT has made available the PowerPoint presentations from the conference on its Web site.

I attended a conference at N.C. A&T last Thursday that sought to answer questions about how the national transition away from fossil fuels will impact low-income communities. Two of the questions floating out there were: How will low-income residents in this region benefit from the national push to make buildings more energy efficient? And, What kind of "green jobs" can they take advantage of?

The university's Center for Energy Research and Technology (CERT) hosted the conference in partnership with the American Association for Blacks in Energy. I've been told that copies of the presentations and a video of the event will be posted on the center's Web site.

I attended the first half of the conference so I can speak for now only about what I heard during the keynote presentation and two panel discussions; I invite other attendees to chime in. What I heard was speakers who were more comfortable explaining how the low-income could get their home weatherized than how they will get jobs.

First, weatherization. North Carolina will receive about $208 million in weatherization funds under the federal stimulus plan, with $132 million going to the Weatherization Assistance Program and the rest going to the state energy office. Households with an income within 200 percent of the poverty line will be eligible for the funds. That income limit equates to about $44,000 for a family of four.

You can find here analyses done for the Weatherization Assistance Program on what it will take to weatherize an anticipated one million homes nationally per year. Zack Hamlett of the N.C. Office of Economic Opportunity, which administers the program here, told me on Friday that he has until May 12 to submit a hiring plan to the U.S. Department of Energy. The department also needs to decide how address multi-family housing, which it has not focused on weatherizing in the past, he said.

By the way, residents in Guilford, Forsyth, Rockingham and Randolph counties would contact Regional Consolidated Services Inc. at 629-5141 to apply for weatherization services.

Now, the interesting thing about the weatherization program is that it at least gives you a working definition of the word "low-income." For the government's purposes, it's households with an income at or lower than 200 percent of the federal poverty line. That's a wide net, because it can include, in reality, a middle class family with a working father and stay-at-home mother, as well as a disabled or elderly person receiving Social Security benefits.

That's not the case with the green jobs movement and I did not hear "low-income" defined for the purposes of the CERT conference last week. Are we talking a broke college graduate looking for a job? A underemployed father with only a high school degree? Or a repentant former convict who hasn't had a job in five years?

The distinction is important because many green jobs proponents have pushed for green jobs as a way to provide good-paying and steady employment for people in poor, minority communities who do not have the money, time (because of life circumstances) or aptitude for four-year college degrees.

Now, President Obama didn't advocate for economic stimulus as a means to address solely unemployment/underemployment among the country's poor. However, faculty at CERT and AABE sought to speak to specific stakeholder groups -- namely, the black and low-income populations.

While the presenters provided some good context, few explicitly answered the question of what green jobs might be available in North Carolina and who would likely benefit. Paul Quinlan of the N.C. Sustainable Energy Association said that over the short term, laid off construction workers who can quickly retrain to weatherize homes, can expect work funded through the federal stimulus funds. A long term trend would be the companies hiring people to install solar panels, design high performance buildings, and build components for alternative energy systems, such as wind turbines. Unclear is what work would be available to people without a related degree or experience.

"There's incredibly high expectations for green jobs this year," Quinlan said at the conference. "It's not going to be as visible so people will be disappointed because the expectations were so high."

It's starting to seem like anybody who tries to get in on this work as a fresh start will be competing against an existing workforce. For proof, take a look at this workforce analysis done for the federal Weatherization Assistance Program regarding how many workers are needed to weatherize one million homes nationally over the next two to 10 years. The report maintains that government agencies are likely to hire people with previous experience as it takes an average of eight months, for example, to train an energy auditor.

From the report:

"It takes approximately two to four months to train a crew to perform Weatherization services with a proficiency that guarantees the savings and return on investment. It takes approximately six to eight months to train an energy auditor for assessment accuracy and two to four months to train a quality control inspector to conduct required oversight. It will be critical to utilize the existing energy professionals from other statewide or national projects to supplement the hiring of staff to perform work in the field."

The report doesn't specify who will pay for the training. So should individuals expect they will need to go to school for some type of training or intern with an experienced person before they even get hired for some full time work? Will government agencies be able weatherize a record number of homes within the given timeline while still producing quality work? And what if Congress does not reauthorize funds past the first two years?

How closely are you following the federal stimulus as it relates to the energy measures and job creation? What are you still confused about? Do you you have confidence that the funding will create lasting jobs, particularly as it relates to low-income populations?

I recently learned that a few N.C. cities will join hundreds across the globe in turning off the lights for Earth Hour on March 28: Winston-Salem, Charlotte, Lincolnton and Asheville, as well as Triad Air Awareness. Now, I'm trying to find out what buildings in those cities will go dark at that 8:30 p.m. hour.

Earth Hour is an annual symbolic event in which communities demonstrate their commitment to finding solutions for climate change.

Update: Winston-Salem facilities manager Randy Rogers responded that city employees will turn off all non-essential lighting at City Hall and the municipal building. His department has also distributed information to other city departments encouraging them to do the same.

Maggie Ullman with the city of Asheville's sustainability office said she is recommending that the city shut off outdoor spotlighting on City Hall and the Council will make a decision next week.

City post offices are doing their part to help government agencies meet a federal goal of cutting energy use over the next seven years.

The U.S. Postal Service hired ADMMicro in Roanoke, Va. to install programmable thermostats at 16 offices in Greensboro in 2007. The systems automatically turn down the heat or reduce air conditioning in empty buildings.

“Those buildings – like most commercial and some residential buildings, [ran] their heating and air conditioning pretty much at the same temperatures for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, whether someone is in those buildings or not,” said Robert McNiece, the agency’s facilities manager.

The offices have since cut energy use by an average 14 percent, with the 6,000-square-foot Guilford station reducing consumption by 31 percent and saving $3,700 in utility bills. McNiece estimated the systems pay for themselves in two years.

Nationally, the Postal Service has cut its energy use by 17 percent at its roughly 34,000 facilities as of September 2008, McNiece said. A 2007 law requires federal buildings to reduce energy by 30 percent by 2015.

“We’re well on our way toward our objective,” he said. “This pilot does a good job of showing… that you can get a whole lot of savings without a whole lot of investment.”

The Postal Service has been a leader for decades in the area of conserving energy and protecting the environment, he said. The agency’s many initiatives and achievements include:

* Winning numerous environmental awards, including the Environmental Protection Agency’s WasteWise Partner of the Year;

* Working with agencies in Maine to launch the nation’s first program allowing consumers to dispose of excess pharmaceuticals by mail in an effort to reduce environmental contamination;

* Delivering mail by bicycle in locations throughout Florida and Arizona;

* Piloting a mail-back program for electronic recycling;

*Operating a fleet of 43,000 alternative-fueled vehicles and testing hydrogen fuel-cell powered vehicles; and

* Constructing new buildings with features such as straw bale insulation, natural lighting, solar thermal systems, rainwater cisterns and vegetative roofs.

Learn about the agency’s other sustainability iniatives here.

Greensboro, like other cities, is going for every federal dollar it can to pay for projects that help cut the city's fossil fuels use.

For one, Pepco should begin work within the month on its $6.1 million energy performance contract on various city buildings, said Steve Randall, Greensboro's sustainability manager. This work is funded through a loan.

But city applied this year for a Sustainable Skylines grant in partnership with N.C. A&T; I wrote about this previously.

Randall also plans to meet with other city employees next week to determine what projects to include in an application for federal energy efficiency and conservation block grants. These funds help pay for projects that reduce fossil fuel emissions; decrease total energy consumption; improve energy efficiency in the transportation, building, and other energy consuming sectors; spur economic growth; and create and/or retain jobs.

Randall said possible Greensboro projects would be a solar photovoltaic array at City Hall (to complement the solar hot water system it's getting) and training or funding for local groups to perform energy audits and weatherize homes in the city.

Randall said the city is analyzing the costs and payback period for a solar PV system.

"We don't want to spend our money improperly but we also don't want to spend federal money improperly," he said.

Then we got into a conversation about how to structure the energy audit process (I'm wondering who will not be doing these audits by the time the money's rolling in). It makes sense to tighten up antiquated housing stock in the city, but it could get complicated. What if the contractors run into lead-based paint and asbestos? Who pays to abate the lead around the new windows? Randall suggested that the city could screen out homes that don't meet certain characteristics or work with other programs to get those problems addressed.

Then we talked about Randall's development of some green guidelines for new city buildings. It looks like he will model them off what other cities in the state are doing in requiring major city construction to meet LEED certification. Check out Durham's policy and comparisons between different cities.

Check out this overview of the federal stimulus package that state energy Director Larry Shirley gave to lawmakers this week:

"In many instances funds will be distributed through existing formulas to programs with proven track records and accountability measures already in place.... Governors, mayors or others making funding decisions must personally certify that the investment has been fully vetted and is an appropriate use of taxpayer dollars. "

Update: The conference flier.

The Center for Energy Research and Technology will hold a conference on March 19 called "Sustainable Energy Alternatives and Their Impact on Low-Income Citizens." The conference will take place from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (with a banquet at 6 p.m.) at the A&T alumni-foundation event center at 200 N. Benbow Road. The conference is the result of a partnership with the American Association of Blacks in Energy.

Presenters include Nita Patel, of Duke Energy in Cincinnati; Joe Lucas, of the Association of Clean Coal; Paul Quinlan with the N.C. Sustainable Energy Association, Gary Sink, of Red Birch Energy in Virginia, and others.

Workshops will focus on clean coal opportunities, green jobs, biomass uses and the effects of green technologies on personal lifestyles. All with a focus on impacts on the low-income community.

Registration is $25 (plus another $25 for the dinner and banquet). Contact coordinators Venetia Fisher or Matthew O'Brien at 256-2406 or frseng@ncat.edu for more information.

For those of you curious about possible funds for energy efficiency projects, North Carolina stands to get around $6 billion from the federal stimulus package. According to a memo from Gov. Perdue, amounts for weatherization and the state energy office range from $78 million to $140 million and $12 million to $77 million, respectively.

From a press release: Nominations will be accepted through March 13 for the Leadership in Sustainable Energy Awards, which are presented annually at the N.C. Sustainable Energy Conference to entities and individuals that have made an outstanding contribution in helping North Carolina achieve its sustainability goals.

The awards will be presented at the sixth annual conference, which will be held April 14-15 at the McKimmon Center in Raleigh. They include:

* The Sustainable Energy Champion award, represents the pinnacle of statewide leadership in at least two of the following categories: renewable energy, alternative fuels, energy efficiency, economic development, and environmental stewardship.

* The four Sustainable Energy Leadership awards will recognize the programs, businesses and/or individuals who have demonstrated the greatest impact in at least one of the categories listed above.

Nomination forms are available on the State Energy Office Web site (click on Nominations Form). Please fax completed nomination forms to Jeannette Martin at 919-733-2953 or e-mail to energyinfo@doa.nc.gov. Call 919-733-2230 for more information.

To register or learn more about the Sustainable Energy Conference, call the N.C. State University Office of Professional Development at 919-515-2261, or visit the Web site (click on Conferences).

Mark your calendars for these building and business-related events:

Greening historic buildings:
Preservation Greensboro sponsors a presentation on LEED certification for historic building renovations on Feb. 10.

Get schooled by the Rocky Mountain Institute:
Leaders from the renowned institute will speak Feb. 18 at the Center for the Environment at Catawba College in Salisbury on “Tackling Air Quality & Climate Change Issues through a Low-Carbon Electrical System: Implications for Businesses and Communities.”

Changing the culture at your workplace:
Learn at Wake Forest University on Feb. 20 how to overcome systemic and interdependent obstacles to sustainable practices.

I got this press release late so I don't know the particular reason it was released today. It basically summarizes the energy performance contract the city of Greensboro has entered into to improve energy efficiency in municipal buildings. It says:

The City of Greensboro has reached a contract agreement with Pepco Energy Services of Arlington, Virginia, on a $6.1 million energy efficiency project. Under terms of the contract energy usage will be reduced by 28 percent with energy conservation measures to be installed in 46 City-owned buildings. Potential energy savings is estimated to be more than $6.5 million over the next 13 years. Money saved on energy costs will actually pay for the new equipment and installation.

The multi-year contract calls for Pepco to install energy efficient lighting, replace old chillers, update building automation systems, commission and rebalance heating and air-conditioning systems, and install water saving fixtures in many City-owned facilities.

“A lot of this equipment has needed to be replaced for years, but we haven’t had the money to do it,” states Mitchell Johnson, City Manager. “Now, through our contract with Pepco Energy Services, the City will have over $6 million in new equipment and infrastructure and will reduce the City’s energy usage by 28 percent.”

The contract provides solar energy for space heating and hot water systems at the Melvin Municipal Office Building and at five City Fire stations. And the project includes an energy awareness program to train building occupants on efficient practices.

The City of Greensboro’s carbon footprint will be reduced each year by eliminating 11 million pounds of carbon dioxide, the equivalent of planning more than 1,700 acres of trees.

The project will be managed by Pepco Energy Services, but much of the work will be performed by local companies, including a commitment of 10 percent minority contract representation. Construction is due to begin in February 2009 with an estimated completion date of February 2010.

I missed this report when it came out in December, but thought you'd like the current 411 on ENERGY STAR products.

The Office of the Inspector General found "ENERGY STAR program’s reported savings claims were inaccurate and the reported annual savings unreliable."

I read once that even programmable thermostats weren't as reliable as claimed in lowering energy usage. I'll link that report once I find it.

More here.

I just found this out today, but apparently a national energy forum is taking place on Wednesday and Thursday. It's free and online.

Details from a press release:

WHO: Fortune 500 CEOs, COOs, CFOs, public policy leaders, sustainability & energy experts & innovators of energy products & services.

WHAT: www.VirtualEnergyForum.com, a free online-only conference, brings together 5,000 Fortune 500 executives, public policy leaders & energy innovators in an innovative interactive format. Live video presentations by energy experts, with questions answered real-time.

Topics: Obama administration, federal funding, municipal or public works, green building, energy-efficient technologies, sustainability, alternative energy, clean technologies, and manufacturing.

WHEN: Wednesday and Thursday, 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. EST.

WHERE: Entirely online at www.VirtualEnergyForum.com. Register and Login Dec. 10-11 to attend this live, interactive event, from the ease of your PC. To view coverage of the last Virtual Energy Forum by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, or to view the complete list of speakers and agenda, visit www.VirtualEnergyForum.com.

WHY: President-elect Barack Obama pledged on Dec. 6 to launch the biggest public works program since the construction of the interstate highway system in the 1950s. The estimated $700 Billion plan is projected to include a push to make federal buildings more energy efficient.

The Virtual Energy Forum includes speaker sessions that address this topic, including:

· Mike Kearney of Siemens Building Technologies, speaking on "Practical Strategies to Green Existing Buildings" on Thursday at 4:30 p.m.

· Kevin Kampschroer, US General Services Administration, "Making the Federal Green Building a Reality" on Thursday at 5:15 p.m.

· Public sector keynote speakers at the event include:

o The Honorable James T. Kelliher, Chairman of the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

o The Honorable Ed Markey, US House Select Committee on Energy Independence

o Kathleen Hogan, US Environmental Protection Agency

o Paul P. Bollinger Jr., United States Army

o Kevin W. Billings, of the United States Air Force.

This sounds interesting and I will try to check it out this week.

Update (Friday): I took a look at the report and found some good points, particularly about states overlooking the importance of energy conservation in lowering fossil fuel-powered electricity demand. People often pay lip service to this but at the end of the day utilities and their employees are worried about revenue and jobs. And consumers want their big screen TVs and computers.

But consumers can have direct control over their energy use and wallets by reducing energy use, not just through weatherizing but through changed habits and dependencies. And it's going to become more important with all the layoffs taking place. Ways to curtail energy use include reducing the number of appliances and gadgets one uses at home, hanging laundry on clothes lines with perhaps neighbors sharing dryers during cold and rainy weather.

The Cato report argues that states would do better to focus on the goal rather than the method so as to not unfairly benefit a few industries while shutting out others. Moreover, it's unclear what the net impact will be of massive use of solar panel projects, wind farms, biomass/animal waste conversion and so on. For example, not everyone is happy about Fibrowatt's chicken waste burning plants in North Carolina. And what will be the economic and environmental impacts of converting land to biomass production?

Still, I would be interested in seeing a comparison study between subsidies and incentives provided for the established fossil fuel, nuclear and hydroelectric industries and those for renewable/alternative energy. We obviously cannot redo the past but I wonder how developed the fossil fuel and nuclear energy industries would be without government taxpayer support during the 20th century. Perhaps the situation would be better. Perhaps it would be worse.

-------------------------------------------

A new report out by the Cato Institute questions the economics of the renewable energy portfolio trend where states are requiring utilities to supply a certain percentage of their electricity from renewable energy. Twenty-six states have renewable portfolio requirements, including North Carolina, whose lawmakers passed standards in 2007.

Note: The institute espouses a "market-liberal" vision and opposes government planning mandates:

"Market liberals appreciate the complexity of a great society, they recognize that socialism and government planning are just too clumsy for the modern world. It is--or used to be--the conventional wisdom that a more complex society needs more government, but the truth is just the opposite. The simpler the society, the less damage government planning does. Planning is cumbersome in an agricultural society, costly in an industrial economy, and impossible in the information age. Today collectivism and planning are outmoded and backward, a drag on social progress."

I'll have comments on the report later, but feel free to chime in.

Update: The Oil Drum will be providing a series of analyses and commentary on the World Energy Outlook. The Oil Drum is a superb collaborative energy analysis site so I encourage you to check it out.

The International Energy Agency released its much-anticipated, exhaustive (and leaked) 2008 World Energy Outlook today. The major concern? Constrained investment in a global recession will prevent companies from providing oil when we really need it.

Find the executive summary here and an easily digestible fact sheet here.

From the Financial Times:

"The organisation found that even with investment, the fields were declining at 6.7 per cent and that this rate was accelerating. That means that 45m barrels a day would have to be found and produced in the coming 22 years even if world demand remained completely unchanged. As it stands however, the IEA expects demand to rise from 85m bpd in 2007 to 106m b/d in 2030, making the challenge that much greater....

Many of the most sharply declining fields lie in developed countries, including in areas such as the North Sea and Alaska. This means the west will become less and less of a player in terms of production, while Persian Gulf countries become more important.

The west’s declining importance applies to its role not just as a supplier of oil but a customer. "We think OECD oil demand has peaked,” Mr Birol said, adding: “The OECD countries’ role in the energy world is becoming less and less important.”

Obviously, oil supplies are not our biggest problem right now, what with demand tanking and prices at roughly $60 per barrel. But what happens when demand picks back up?

Oh, and if you still have time after reading the IEA report, check out what the U.S. Government Accountability Office has to say about when we will see widespread carbon capture: No time soon.

Good summaries of carbon sequestration here and here.

Get this. A new vocabulary word for the climate change aware has popped up in recent news articles. "Carborexic" -- short for carbon or energy anorexic, describes people "obsessing over personal carbon emissions to an unhealthy degree, the way crash dieters watch the bathroom scale."

A quote from Australia's The Daily Telegraph:

Head of the University of Sydney Anxiety Disorders Clinic Dr. Mairwen Jones had seen an increase in patients suffering from climate change-related obsessive compulsive `checking' disorders.

She explained that some patients had begun checking their gas and power meters constantly to monitor their usage, while others worried about their petrol consumption and their car's odometer reading.

"A person who says: 'I constantly check the tap', now it's not that they're worried about a flood, but they say 'I don't want to waste water with elevated temperatures and drought, and I'm worried about my impact on the environment.''

Huh?

And The New York Times article says one man who might be carborexic drives his car on waste vegetable oil and has no heating or air conditioning units in his condo. Where does he live? Culver City, Calif., where the average highs reach 81 degrees and the lows 46 degrees, according to Weather.com. Yeah, he sounds like the poster child of irrational behavior.

It's possible there are people whose obsessive compulsive behaviors manifest themselves through energy-related actions, but I don't believe those examples were given in the stories cited. The National Institute of Mental Health defines obsessive compulsive disorder as "an anxiety disorder and is characterized by recurrent, unwanted thoughts (obsessions) and/or repetitive behaviors (compulsions). Repetitive behaviors such as handwashing, counting, checking, or cleaning are often performed with the hope of preventing obsessive thoughts or making them go away. Performing these so-called 'rituals,' however, provides only temporary relief, and not performing them markedly increases anxiety."

Now, I'm not a clinical psychiatrist or psychologist, but it seems to me that an example of energy-related OCD behavior is obsessing over a particular setting on the thermostat (i.e. setting it on only odd-digit numbers like 59 degrees or 61 degrees) or some other type of irrational behavior that has no inherent value. People experimenting with lifestyle changes brought about by environmental or energy concerns does not in and of itself signify mental illness.

By the way, you'll find a couple responses to the term "carborexic" here and here.

Now, let's be honest. Lifestyle changes or temporary experiments such as tracking your garbage for a year or eating a 100 Mile Diet, can be a source of conflict in the home if spouses and relatives don't agree. That's the case with any change or big decision, such as starting a business or moving in an in-law. Therapy might be needed in some cases. The difference here is in what's considered culturally accepted or mainstream.

But I think the articles missed an opportunity to generate discussion about the underlying cultural and economic changes occurring across the country. People frequently refer to the Great Depression when talking or writing about our current financial crisis. Let's not forget that during the depression people were quite obsessive about what they used and the money they spent. They had to be.

Even now, families experiencing financial difficulty are trying to figure out how to stretch their dollars and imbue with dignity sacrifices they have to make. I recently heard on an NPR program that one disabled women's funds are so tight that she has gone to eating only two meals a day. And if a family is energy/environmentally conscious and broke, they might be doing a host of things, including setting their thermostat as low as they can tolerate, using fans instead of AC, and reusing plastic bags. All of a sudden, frugal is back in style.

What do you think? Do you think energy obsession is becoming more of a problem? Do you see evidence of this among friends and family in the Triad?

The Financial Times ran a story yesterday saying that it obtained a draft version of the much anticipated World Energy Report by the International Energy Agency. In summary: "Without extra investment to raise production, the natural annual rate of output decline is 9.1 per cent."

The story says, "The findings suggest the world will struggle to produce enough oil to make up for steep declines in existing fields, such as those in the North Sea, Russia and Alaska, and meet long-term de­mand. The effort will become even more acute as prices fall and investment decisions are delayed."

The IEA is not happy about the leak.

FYI: North Carolinians who planned to upgrade to an energy efficient appliance can get a break from the state sales tax by scheduling the purchase on Nov. 7-9. State legislators last year established a sales tax holiday on the first Friday-Sunday of November for certain Energy Star appliances.

Green jobs supporters in Greensboro will be participating in a national fundraising and grassroots organizing event for presidential candidate Barack Obama from 6-8 p.m. Oct. 20 at Sticks and Stones restaurant on Walker Avenue.

Clean Tech and Green Business for Obama (CT4-O) and other environmental leaders from around the country are organizing, with the support of the Obama Campaign, an “Evening to Re-energize America.” The event will bring together thousands of people at over 300 house parties/fundraisers across the country, including San Francisco and Colorado Springs.

Attendees are responsible for their own food and drinks. To RSVP, e-mail pjmdesign AT gmail.com.

By the way, find here the environmental positions of Obama and John McCain along with a comparison by the League of Conservation Voters. Let me know of any related events going on in support of McCain.

The N.C. State Fair is calling its latest eco-friendly endeavor "Funnel Cakes for Fuel." That is, processing the thousands of gallons of vegetable oil used to deep fry everything from corn dogs to candy bars into biodiesel.

The N.C. Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services expects to collect about 8,000 gallons of used oil this month and process it at its 18 agricultural research stations. The fuel will be used in department tractor-trailers that deliver food to North Carolina schools.

In addition, the fair will add a new exhibit called Green NC that will highlight alternative fuels, renewable energy sources, locally grown foods, recycling, water conservation, etc. Another overdue move: four recycling stations on the fairgrounds that will accept plastic bottles and aluminum cans.

The national version of "Kilowatt Ours: A Plan to Re-energize America," a documentary about America's electricity generation, will air on UNC-TV locally this month. The tentative schedule for Greensboro/High Point/Winston-Salem is 10 p.m., Oct. 23.

Visit the Web site to find out how to purchase a DVD or host a screening. I viewed an earlier version of the film last year and found it very practical and down-to-earth. Intended audience: those who have not yet switched to compact fluorescent bulbs.

Piedmont Green Gala? Check. Emerging Issues forum? Check. Nov. 13 Greensboro community sustainability gathering? Check. My calendar is filled with local energy and environment-related forums and workshops taking place this fall. But I'm still waiting for a comprehensive conference on how Triad governments, businesses, community groups and individuals can best prepare for the end of the fossil fuels era. One that draws more than the "experts" and activists.

I'm sure some of these conversations are going on behind closed doors and around the water cooler but the public needs to hear it and talk about it. Many questions are lingering in my mind:

1. How can local foundations and grant-making organizations help fund community-based initiatives to create local energy production or resilience? What obstacles do they face to diverting funds to these projects?

2. What can Triad communities afford to do under a worst-case scenario of limited/declining investment dollars?

3. What strengths or opportunities do Triad governments have that can be applied to the tackling of future energy challenges? For example, one county might have a stellar economic development team that could turn on a dime to draw alternative energy businesses; a city might have public strong support for public transit.

4. What is the public educational system doing and not doing to prepare students for 21st century energy challenges and new lifestyles?

5. What level of agreement do communities have about climate change and peak oil and their potential consequences? In what ways are shared and separate approaches needed?

6. In what areas do cities and homeowners associations need to relax, modify or add codes to help residents and businesses adapt to more expensive energy? What other reasons -- be it health, quality of life, etc. -- exist for making changes?

7. What conflicts do we see arising in necessary changes and business models that have to be addressed (i.e. city revenue vs. decreased water usage; discouraging plastic bags use vs. needed them for recycling business)?

8. What roles do the formal, informal and household economies play in community adaptation? Should residents expect to reduce their energy use and environmental impact through the purchase of goods or services, barter/gifts or do-it-yourself?

9. What social mores, expectations and taboos need to be shifted (i.e. quick and convenient travel, readily-available ice cold drinks, etc.)

10. What grand projects must communities sacrifice because of a shift in priorities?

What questions do you have that you would like to see addressed in a public forum?

Sit in on a discussion about the jobs of the future and theories abound -- as do theorists -- as to the shape future jobs will take. Some people believe globalization will keep chugging along, with careers drawing upon math and science skills the high payers. Others agree that the next labor trend will fit within the existing capitalism paradigm, but it will have a green twist to it.

For example, the Ella Baker Center defines the green economy as "a rapidly growing billion-dollar sector that includes renewable energy sources, organic produce and products, green buildings, alternative fuel vehicles, and more."

The center defines a "green-collar job" as "a paid position providing environmentally-friendly products or services; term suggests high standards regarding fair wages, equal opportunity and healthy working conditions; employer may be a private business, government, non-profit or cooperative. For example: organic farmer, sustainable forestry worker, recycling technician or solar panel manufacturer."

In other words, the green economy is just a new-and-improved, decentralized version of industrialization. Investment flows to the most promising technologies and business ideas that ultimately generate more wealth. Green entrepreneurs also are motivated by a desire to stay competitive against other companies producing similar or identical products.

It's been said that the United States has squandered a lot of precious time by operating without a comprehensive energy policy since the oil crises of the 1970s and 1980s. Now, rising energy prices have motivated many Americans to call for a plan that will bring about the country's "energy independence," or at the very least, wean us off of Middle Eastern oil.

They just differ on who should control the process. Should government swing the stick that will make businesses and consumers adopt renewable energy and practice conservation? Or should businesses alone dangle in front of customers the carrot of competively priced alternatives?

To prove their case, representatives of either argument trot out historical examples of when government or businesses, or in some cases individuals, best addressed previous challenges and crises. Arguments tend to float near the extremes of the "invisible hand of the free market" and communism while ignoring various shades of gray in between.

(Examples of energy plans with different emphases: here, here and here. Which kind do you most favor?)

The debate also seems to be largely about how we can continue to grow the economy while either switching to alternative energy sources or decreasing oil prices through new supplies and technology. Barack Obama wants to spend $150 billion on clean energy jobs, increase the production of plug-in hybrid cars and implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program. John McCain wants to eliminate mandates and subsidies for corn-based ethanol and expand off-shore drilling.

But has the debate been properly defined? Should we focus solely on prices as motivation for lifestyle changes without talking about equitable distribution of resources or the total amount of fossil fuels we should burn given the various environmental concerns?

Should you and I leave it up to government or the marketplace without reevaluating or reprioritizing our dependence on modern air conditioning and heat, personal vehicles and industrialized food? And do current economic and government policies work equally well in a world of abundant resources and a world of declining resources?

Are politicians and economists telling the truth when they brag about fossil fuels' benefits without disclosing their environmental, political and social costs (of course, all courses of action will have some disadvantages)? And are they making promises they can't keep, pretending that energy independence can come without extreme sacrifice on the part of Americans?

Is it fair for Americans to whine about taxes and high gas prices but not use their own ingenuity and creativity to cut their fuel and electricity use? What do you think is missing from the debate?

For many people, the use of compact flourescent light bulbs in their homes is a no-brainer: they consume a fraction of the electricity needed to operate traditional light bulbs. But some people worry that the tiny amount of mercury in CFLs could poison or pollute.

Well, a new state Web site tells you how to appropriately dispose of them. Find here where to dispose of bulbs in Greensboro.

(Note: Only 32 of 100 counties in North Carolina have hazardous waste centers that can collect these bulbs, according to this. The price alone discourages many people from switching; now they are supposed to go out of their way to get rid of them?)

According to the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources:

"Tube or linear fluorescent lights are in widespread use in commercial, industrial and institutional settings in North Carolina, and CFL use is expanding rapidly in both the commercial and residential sectors. A study submitted to the state's General Assembly in March showed that from 2005-2007, CFLs jumped from 5 percent to 20 percent market share. The study estimated that 120 million fluorescents are in current use in North Carolina and 15 million lamps are ready to be discarded each year.

"However, since both tube lamps and CFLs contain a small amount of mercury, recycling fluorescent lights is the best way to minimize the release of mercury from the lamps to the environment. Despite their mercury content, energy-efficient fluorescent lights help achieve a greater net reduction in mercury by reducing the mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants."