By: Will Marshall

When Earth Day was first celebrated 40 years ago today, environmental distress was in our face. Rivers caught fire, oil spills fouled U.S. shores, toxic waste dumps proliferated, and Los Angeles seemed permanently wreathed in smog. Now we worry more about things we don’t see — runoff and waste from farms, growing carbon concentrations in the atmosphere, fish disappearing from the oceans.

This change underscores both the successes and the limits of the “first generation” of environmental law and regulation. Starting with the landmark Clean Air Act of 1970, Americans for the first time began to grapple seriously with the environmental havoc wrought by the industrial revolution.

We’ve made undeniable progress since then, as Gregg Easterbrook and other writers have documented. Our air and water are cleaner. This would be a good day, in fact, for environmentalists and their business antagonists not to indulge in the usual doomsday talk. What we’ve learned since the first Earth Day is that ecological calamity isn’t inevitable, that the damage we do to nature is often reversible, and that we can curb pollution without wrecking our economy.

Republicans still cling to the myth that a clean environment is a luxury we can’t afford, hence their refusal to take climate change seriously. And some environmental activists evidently believe that alarmism in the defense of ecological health is no vice. If the idea is to shake Americans out of their “denial” about global warming, the opposite seems to be happening. Polls show the public is growing more skeptical about the hazards of climate change. Allegations (unfounded, as it tuns out) that British university researchers cooked climate data in an excess of environmental correctness haven’t helped.

(more…)

GBI Research, the leading business intelligence provider, has released its latest report “Renewable Energy Investment Opportunities in Emerging Economies” that gives an in-depth analysis of the emerging economies as upcoming renewable energy hotspots and provides investment forecasts up to 2015. Investments in emerging economies reached $65.86 billion in 2009, an increase of 26.42% over 2008.

The research analyses the growth, evolution and investments in renewable energy markets in emerging countries of the world, and identifies potential hotspots for renewable energy investments around the world. The study provides a detailed analysis and investment forecasts in key emerging countries namely, China, India and Brazil, as well as a detailed analysis of financial investments by deal type in key emerging countries.

Global investments expected to reach top $650 billion by 2015

Investments in renewable energy increased from $39.24 billion in 2001 to $336.78 billion in 2009, at a CAGR of 30.8% during the period 2001-09. Total investments in the renewable energy sector have risen by 43.4% in 2009 from $283.11 billion in 2008. Global Investments in the renewable energy industry are mainly driven by policies and incentives offered by the respective federal governments in different countries. The investments in the industry are mainly aimed at creating employment opportunities and driving away the clouds of economic downturn in many nations. Investments in the renewable energy industry are likely to increase in the forecast period 2009-15 and are expected to reach $653.35 billion by 2015.

(more…)

By: Brian Keane

As we near the 40th anniversary of Earth Day, what better time to take the pulse of the American people on solar energy?

For decades solar has been marketed to the American people as a product that is “good for the environment.” And indeed, it is good for the environment. The problem is, as a marketing and sales technique, simply being good for the environment won’t get you a lot of customers.

Fortunately, like Earth Day, the solar industry is growing up! We’re learning just how vital strong consumer research, solid messaging and aggressive marketing campaigns are to creating a vibrant solar market.

New consumer market research by my organization, SmartPower, shows that reducing one’s long-term energy costs is often more compelling to consumers than the obvious environmental benefits. In the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, this really shouldn’t surprise anyone — least of all President Obama, who clearly understands our country’s energy’s challenges. (His pledge of $3.4 billion in Recovery Act funds to modernize America’s electric grid seems to be just a first step toward modernizing our energy infrastructure.) But these good policies must be driven by a solid understanding of how to market solar energy to the American consumer.

(more…)

The U.S. government, criticized for lax scrutiny of Energy Star products, has announced it will further tighten its certification rules.

Prior to using the Energy Star label, the U.S. stamp of approval for energy efficiency, companies will now have to submit complete lab reports and results about their products to the Environmental Protection Agency, according to the announcement Wednesday. The EPA will no longer rely on an automated approval process.

Also, by the end of this year, all manufacturers will have to use accredited labs for product testing, which is currently required for some but not all Energy Star products.

The changes, meant to bolster others announced a month ago, come amid mounting criticism that the 18-year-old Energy Star program doesn’t do enough to ensure its products meet its own efficiency criteria.

(more…)

By: Tom Philpott

This is a post about Brazil’s sugarcane-ethanol “miracle,” but I can’t resist starting off with a look askance at our own corn-derived ethanol phenomenon. Has there ever been a “green” technology more ecologically discredited than corn-based ethanol?

It may yield slightly more energy than it consumes during production–but only if you grant a generous credit to distillers grains, an ethanol byproduct now busily being shoveled into CAFOs (and exported to China) as a highly dubious livestock feed. But corn ethanol’s unimpressive energy balance makes it a pathetic candidate to displace energy-rich petroleum gasoline.

Moreover, its total greenhouse gas emissions are likely titanic–a fact limply acknowledged by the EPA and then eventually retracted under industry pressure. For the love of God, the stuff is based on industrial corn–by far our biggest user of soil-degrading synthetic nitrogen fertilizer.

(more…)