Achieving renewable energy targets will involve increased deployment of some technologies, while phasing out others.  Amidst all of this discussion, a few words regarding another tool to reduce energy consumption and the associated pollutants while saving the energy consumer money may be spoken.  However, many may not realize this less flashy tool is available today and can result in lower emissions almost immediately.

Technology advances have become drivers and inspiration for actionable strategies to change the manner in which businesses, consumers and government organizations devise policies, make decisions and implement practical plans around energy use. The Three I's: Instrumentation, Interconnection, and Intelligence

“It takes money to make money”… even when “a penny saved is a penny earned” Profit-maximizing firms only invest in both revenue-generating and cost-cutting activities.  In most public sector organizations, however, money is made generally when it is not spent, but even doing that sometimes takes money.   Energy savings projects have traditionally been funded by: Grants Loans Tax Credits Other Incentives Two other vehicles have become very popular in recent years.  Let’s take a look at them.

The survey asked questions regarding sustainability initiatives that have been undertaken by local governments. Over 2,000 local governments responded to the survey. The survey was developed by ICMA’s Center for Sustainable Communities, the Center for Urban Innovation at Arizona State University, the Arizona State University’s Global Institute of Sustainability, and the Alliance for Innovation.

In the past few months, the budget has been a huge topic of discussion and federal agencies across the board have programs on the chopping block. In our previous posts, we’ve described energy challenges faced by federal organizations and the importance of adopting energy management initiatives—and these are powerful ways to reduce costs.

 In the last post, we used IBM BTV as an example of how the goal to increase reliability and to become more competitive in the chip manufacturing market evolved into a terrific Energy Management Program (EMP). In this post, we’ll describe the high-level nuts and bolts of an EMP, and how it can be applied to federal agencies to help cut costs, reduce CO2, and wean the country from its dependence on foreign oil. 

A quick read through any newspaper can bring up some dismal facts about the state of our nation and the current geopolitical climate. Among these pressures, which include a soaring deficit, budget challenges, and high unemployment, is the issue of energy independence.  We are constantly bombarded with reasons why we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil—and we should be—as it represents a positive step for our national security, our environment, and our bottom line.

Today’s business environment in both public and private sectors is uncharted territory.  In the past, business organizations have coped with dramatic change and uncertainty, such as global and regional war, political unrest, disruptions in source of supply and rising cost of resources, foreign and domestic competition, rapidly evolving technology, climatic change, critical financial constraints and general economic downturns. However, today’s business organizations face all of these challenges at the same time.

While the federal government receives much attention for its environmental initiatives, much activity is now taking place at the state and local levels to improve energy efficiency and sustainability. The report sets forth six strategies that local government decision makers and administrators can use to develop new sustainability programs or refine existing programs.

Laura Chick, California's Inspector General for the Recovery Act has never been known for mincing words. So, it was entirely characteristic when she wrote a biting letter to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger back in mid-August. Her concern: The fact that spending on the state's green building projects seemed to be following guidelines from the Molasses School of Management. Case in point: While $25 million had been approved to fund energy savings in state buildings in September 2009, by the end of June, 2010, only 1 percent of the money had been spent.