post

Why would you feature oil companies as customer references?

Oiled Turtle Rescue and Rehabilitation

The BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico was, unfortunately, far from being an isolated incident. Chevron in Ecuador, Shell in Nigeria, Exxon in Alaska – name me an oil company and I’ll name you an environmental disaster. And, it appears that some of them are responsible for funding, climate change denial.

And yet at a number of conferences I’ve been at recently, oil companies have been mentioned as customer references from the podium. From my position as an advocate of green measures, that irks.

Hasso Plattner keynoting the Sapphire Now conference

At SAP’s Sapphire Now conference last week for example, during the keynotes given by Vishal Sikka, CTO, and Hasso Plattner, Chair and co-founder of SAP, three oil companies were featured. And this is a company which is going to great pains to establish a reputation for itself as being being Sustainable.

It is not like SAP were short of customer references – there were probably north of 30 customers shown between the two back-to-back keynotes. No-one would have complained if there were three less.

So, they had oil companies, ok, well to counter that how many of the other customer companies represented were renewable generators? Not one. Not a single one.

C’mon guys, it’s not like renewable generators have a shortage of big data – I remember on visiting Logica’s center of excellence in Lisbon seeing their windfarm management application. They told me that a typical turbine outputs around 250 data points per minute and that particular application was managing over 2,000 wind turbines.

Leaving Logica aside, there are plenty of other well known companies heavily involved in renewables who could have been showcased – think Siemens, Vestas, Samsung, Mitsubishi, Iberdrola, Hyundai, GE, Gamesa, and Alstom for wind energy; then there’s Bosch, Sharp, and Sanyo for solar, for example.

In fairness to SAP, one of their demos, from UK energy retailer Centrica, was a Smart Meter Analytics demo where Centrica was able to utilise the analytics to help consumers reduce their power consumption – more on which in another post.

And, I should not ignore that fact that oil companies such as BP have invested in renewables but is that where their focus really is? SAP is pushing the sustainability agenda and for that they should be given credit. But… show us the evidence in the real world of customers that SAP is supporting.

That’s how you gain credibility.

You should follow me on Twitter here

Photo credit NOAA’s National Ocean Service

post

Friday Green Numbers round-up 06/25/2010

Green numbers

Photo credit Unhindered by Talent

And here is this week’s Green numbers:

  • Australia is no stranger to tight water supplies, and fortunately that means smart water conservation strategies are being devised all the time. Australia is leading the way in everything from strategies to combat desertification to using renewable energy for desalination plants, and now it is putting that knowledge to work on six new infrastructure projects that can save 1.3 billion gallons of water.

    tags: greennumbers, australia, smart water, water conservation, desalination, renewable energy, desertification

  • GROWING numbers of girls are reaching puberty before the age of 10, raising fears of increased sexual activity among a new generation of children.

    Scientists believe the phenomenon could be linked to obesity or exposure to chemicals in the food chain, and is putting girls at greater long-term risk of breast cancer.

    A study has revealed that breast development in a sample of 1,000 girls started at an average age of 9 years and 10 months ? an entire year earlier than when a similar cohort was examined in 1991.

    tags: greennumbers, girls, puberty, obesity, chemicals, food chain, breast cancer

  • There’s some interesting new data out on recent shifts in electricity demand and consumption, courtesy of the DOE/EIA.

    In 2008, total U.S. power generation was 4.1 million GWh. In 2009, that fell by 4 percent, to 3.9 million. That’s a 4 percent reduction — clearly the result of the economic slowdown. Nothing surprising there.

    What’s interesting, though, is how generation shifted by fuel type. Over the same year, coal-fired power generation fell by 11 percent, from almost 2 million GWh to just under 1.8 million.

    tags: greennumbers, fuel, type, coal-fired power generation, coal, DOE, EIA, U.S. power generation, electricity demand, electricity consumption

  • Just how important is turning off computers at the end of the day in an office building? Very, if a company wants to save big bucks on electricity bills. According to UC San Diego researchers, 50-80% of a modern building’s electricity use goes to IT equipment, particularly desktop computers. A report last year showed that not shutting down PCs equated to $2.8 billion in wasted electricity. Still, many offices don’t encourage their employees to hit shut-down on their PCs for a variety of reasons, including updating software while everyone is out or being able to keep the computer attached to the network so information on the machine can be accessed at any time. However, Microsoft’s new Sleep Proxy system claims it can help cut energy consumption by 60-80%, without getting in the way of office systems.

    tags: greennumbers, IT equipment, electricity use, Sleep Proxy

  • At a presentation at the Oxford Energy Futures conference on June 11th, Andy Duff, non-executive chair of RWE npower, made some controversial assertions about the future of electricity in the UK. He focused on three propositions.

    a)????? The UK cannot meet its carbon targets without new nuclear

    b)????? Electricity demand will grow at 1% less than GDP growth

    c)?????? The UK will not have enough electricity capacity by the latter part of this decade unless UK society accepts a doubling of wholesale electricity prices, which is the minimum required to free the capital investment required to 1) meet demand and 2) decarbonise sufficiently fast.

    In summary, we need nuclear and we all need to accept a substantial rise in electricity prices to pay for it.

    tags: Oxford Energy Futures, greennumbers, npower, nuclear, electricity demand

  • Chinese consumers are becoming as cynical as those in the West about the way companies communicate about their social and environmental performance, according to the latest wave of GlobeScan’s annual global tracking research on public views of corporate social responsibility.\n\nThe study, which interviewed over 30,000 people across 34 countries, finds that while in 2005 more than 80 per cent of Chinese consumers felt that companies communicated ‘honestly and truthfully’ about their social and environmental performance, this has now fallen sharply, with only 40 per cent feeling this way in this year’s study.

    tags: CSR Communications, csr, china, consumers, GlobeScan, greennumbers

  • Today, the chief executives of the five big oil companies ? including BP?s Tony Hayward ? are going to testify before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. According to an e-mail released by that Committee yesterday, a BP drilling engineer warned that the Deepwater Horizon oil rig was a ?nightmare well? that had caused the company problems in the past. The e-mail came just six days before the well exploded:

    tags: bp, oilspill, deepwater horizon, Macondo well, Gulf of Mexico, nightmare well, greennumbers

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

post

Friday Green Numbers round-up 06/18/2010

Green numbers

Photo credit Unhindered by Talent

And here is this week’s Green numbers:

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

You should follow me on twitter here.

post

Friday Green Numbers round-up 06/11/2010

Green numbers

Photo credit Unhindered by Talent

And here is this week’s Green numbers:

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

You should follow me on twitter here.

post

Friday Green Numbers round-up 05/07/2010

Green numbers

Photo credit Unhindered by Talent

And here are this week’s Green numbers:

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

post

Suddenly the business case for being an ethical, non-polluting business seems all the stronger

BP Oil Spill

Photo credit NASA Goddard Photo and Video

Is the massive environment, health and safety (EHS) risks, which fossil fuel companies represent, starting to hurt their businesses?

Reading this morning about the Deepwater Horizon explosion and the continuing oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico I note that BP’s market value has fallen from ?122bn last week to ?102.5bn today – a loss of almost ?20bn in a week (or just over 16% of its value).

What has to be really worrying for BP investors is that

Things must be pretty grim at present in BP’s plush London HQ but it is not like BP have an exceptionally poor record by fossil fuel producers standards. For example:

And this EHS risk is not limited to oil and gas companies. On the contrary:

Massey Energy, the owner of the Upper Big Branch coal mine which exploded four weeks ago, killing 29 miners, has a terrible record of environmental and health and safety abuses. In fact, so bad are they that the FBI announced recently that they would be investigating Massey for the possible bribery of federal officials overseeing mining industry regulation and for potential criminal negligence.

Massey’s main competitors in the US are little better –

With the rapidly increasing number of environmental lawsuits taking place companies like the above are going to be spending more and more of their time in the courts with the consequent losses in time, productivity and reputation which that entails.

When you couple that with the growing interest in environmental issues being taken by the SEC, the EPA and investors and suddenly the business case for being an ethical, non-polluting business seems all the stronger.

After all, as many people noted on Twitter in the last few days, spills of air from wind farms or sun from solar plants are not going to have the devastating environmental consequences we have witnessed in the last decades as a result of our addiction to fossil fuels.

You should follow me on twitter here.

post

Energy and Sustainability show for March 15th

We had a couple of snafu’s on the show today. At the beginning of the show we had some calendaring confusion and a couple of people watching last week’s show thinking it was the live one!

Then I had a close call at the end of the show when I thought I had stopped broadcasting but left the camera and mic on inadvertently! While it is true I uttered an expletive, at least I didn’t do a Nellgate on it!!!

Here is the chatstream from the show:

Tom Raftery :
Hi everyone

?16?:?33
monkchips :

have i been watching last week’s show?
nice

?16?:?34
yellowpark :

hahaha

?16?:?34
monkchips :

well change the recurring calendar entry then …
?
16?:?34
Tom Raftery :

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/313715,11-siberian-tigers-starve-to-death-at-chinese-zoo.html
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/03/chile-earthquake-moved-entire-city-10-feet-to-the-west
http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2010/03/the_challenges.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62E14Z20100315
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/10/spain-barcelona-snow
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/11/juanita-goggins-dead-once_n_495498.html
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/03/nokia-moving-into-kinetically-charged-cell-phones-files-new-patent.php
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20000430-54.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=GreenTech
?
16?:?43
Joe :

some sense from the auto industry at last…
?
16?:?43
MikeTheBee :

Hi Tom, oh, no date display today?
?
16?:?43
Tom Raftery :

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/03/new-charging-method-could-mean-exponentially-faster-battery-recharge-times.php
http://www.nytimes.com//2010/03/12/opinion/12chase.html
http://www.grist.org/article/death-of-a-thousand-cuts

?16?:?47
monkchips :

Smith Electric Vehicles Eyes Road to an IPO http://bit.ly/b76p5F #logistics #WAYmoreinterestingthantesla
never mind Tesla, a logistics EV IPO!
?
16?:?48
Tom Raftery :

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/03/cisco-saves-over-24-million-with-packaging-diet.php
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/03/dell-launches-most-efficient-desktop-computer-to-date.php
http://www.viridity.com/blog/bid/36035/Top-7-Reasons-to-Remove-Orphan-Servers-from-the-Data-Center-Floor
http://www.ceres.org/ceresroadmap
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/news/pn10_042/pn10_042.aspx
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/mar/15/rbs-blinded-by-spin

?16?:?52
Ian B :

UK still has lead in wave and tide development – but for how long?

?16?:?53
MikeTheBee :

Ireland are working hard to take the lead.
?
16?:?53
Tom Raftery :

http://blogs.msdn.com/mspowerutilities/archive/2010/03/11/let-s-call-the-smart-grid-what-it-is-disruptive.aspx
?
16?:?54
Ian B :

Yeah should have said UK and Ireland
?
16?:?55
Tom Raftery :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/mar/15/bp-shell-tar-sands-green-energy
?
16?:?56
monkchips :

this is the same company claims 70% of its employees are workin on cloud…?
?
16?:?57
Tom Raftery :

http://planetgreen.discovery.com/tech-transport/trash-wifi-afghanistan.html
?
16?:?57
monkchips :

superb!
?
16?:?58
Tom Raftery :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/hereford/worcs/8562434.stm

?16?:?58
Ian B :

Too right
?
16?:?58
Tom Raftery :

http://www.fastcompany.com/1575650/cleveland-mall-gets-a-new-life-as-a-giant-greenhouse
?
16?:?58
MikeTheBee :

But all his family keep the money
?
16?:?59
Tom Raftery :

http://www.avaaz.org/en/protect_the_elephants/
?
17?:?00
MikeTheBee :

No date stamp today?, Tom
np
He made 45mill
Thx Tom.
?
17?:?02
Tom Raftery :

Thanks everyone for your comments and interest
?
17?:?03
Ian B :

Thanks Tom
?
17?:?03
monkchips :

nice close! “oh fuck!”#
?
17?:?03
MikeTheBee :

I still find it strange that when I am *not* logged into Zoho chat the links are clickable, but after I log in they are not. Wierd or what.
?
17?:?04
monkchips :

dont have a hand shandy there tom, you’re still broadcasting…
?
17?:?04
MikeTheBee :

You are still *LIVE* Tom
?
17?:?05
monkchips :

how long are you over for? which show is it?
?
17?:?06
MikeTheBee :

THE END!
?
17?:?06
Tom Raftery :

LOL!!!
Thanks guys

post

Should FaceBook’s investors be worried that the site is sourcing energy for its new data center from coal?

Mountain-top removal

Photo credit The Sierra Club

Should FaceBook’s investors be worries that the site is sourcing energy for its new data center from primarily coal-fired power?

FaceBook is fourth largest web property (by unique visitor count) and well on its way to becoming third. It is valued in excess of $10 billion and its investors include Russian investment company DST, Accel Partners, Greylock Partners, Meritech Capital and Microsoft.

FaceBook announced last month that it would be locating its first data center in Prinville Oregon. The data center looks to be all singing and dancing on the efficiency front and is expected to have a Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE) rating of 1.15. So far so good.

However, it soon emerged that FaceBook are purchasing the electricity for their data center from Pacific Power, a utility owned by PacifiCorp, a utility whose primary power-generation fuel is coal!

Sourcing power from a company whose generation comes principally from coal is a very risky business and if there is anything that investors shy away from, it is risk!

Why is it risky?

Coal has significant negative environmental effects from its mining through to its burning to generate electricity contaminating waterways, destroying ecosystems, generation of hundreds of millions of tons of waste products, including fly ash, bottom ash, flue gas desulfurisation sludge, that contain mercury, uranium, thorium, arsenic, and other heavy metals and emitting massive amounts of radiation.

And let’s not forget that coal burning is the largest contributor to the human-made increase of CO2 in the air [PDF].

The US EPA recently ruled that:

current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases–carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)–in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.

Note the wording “the public health and welfare of current and future generations”

Who knows what legislation the EPA will pass in the coming months and years to control CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants in the coming months and years – and the knock on effects this will have on costs.

Now think back to the litigation associated with asbestos – the longest and most expensive tort in US history. Then note that climate change litigation is gaining ground daily, the decision to go with coal as a primary power source starts to look decidedly shaky.

Then GreenPeace decided to wade in with a campaign and FaceBook page to shame FaceBook into reversing this decision. Not good for the compay image at all.

Finally, when you factor in the recent revolts by investors in Shell and BP to decisions likely to land the companies in hot water down the road for pollution, the investors in FaceBook should be asking some serious questions right about now.

post

Seriously people, the correct order is planet first, then people, then profit.

Someone I know and respect made a bit of a boo boo last week and I called him on it. In response to the announcement of BP’s “Giant oil find” in the Gulf of Mexico, he Tweeted:

Giant oil reserver [sic] in the Gulf, most rushing to drill it except the US. Wouldn’t that be ready made jobs and revenue?

To which I replied:

Wouldn’t it be ready-made pollution (CO2)? Ethics of celebrating jobs & revenue based on planetary destruction?

People seem to be all too ready to forget about the fact that climate change doesn’t stop to consider whether there is a recession. It doesn’t say, “oh, there’s a down-turn and you want to pump a few extra million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere? No problem, you should have said, go right ahead”

At least in the case of the BP find, according to this Wall Street Journal analysis, recovery rates may be as low as 5-15% (150-450m barrels of oil) – still a lot of CO2 but significantly less oil than the headlines were suggesting.

e.on UK, is the energy company which owns the infamous Kingsnorth power station. Kingsnorth is one of the largest coal-fired power plants in the UK and alone is responsible for roughly 7.3m tonnes of CO2 being emitted into the atmosphere per annum. e.on UK has launched Talking Energy, a channel on YouTube to foster an online dialogue about energy.

However, as you would expect, the company stresses energy sources which will benefit e.on and its shareholders in the short-term, as opposed to trying to benefit the planet (and thus the company and its shareholders) in the long term. In the video above you see Jeremy Nicholson, lobbyist and Director of the Intensive Energy Users Group – “a single-issue lobby group which campaigns for secure industrial energy supplies at internationally competitive prices”. Jeremy throws out the old lie about the need for baseload power for the electricity grid as a reason to keep investing in carbon polluting energy sources.

The baseload argument is an old one and one which was given its severest kicking recently when the Jon Wellinghof, Chairman of the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said back in April that:

renewables like wind, solar and biomass will provide enough energy to meet baseload capacity and future energy demands. Nuclear and coal plants are too expensive, he added.

“I think baseload capacity is going to become an anachronism,” he said. “Baseload capacity really used to only mean in an economic dispatch, which you dispatch first, what would be the cheapest thing to do. Well, ultimately wind’s going to be the cheapest thing to do, so you’ll dispatch that first.”

Now if the chairman of the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission believes that renewables can provide enough power to meet baseload and future energy demands, I’m going to take his word over e.on’s and their lobbyist’s.

e.on, some questions for you:

  • Does CO2 cause climate change (and the consequent deaths of thousands of people annually, not to mention species extinctions, environmental destruction, etc.)?
  • Do you care that your pollution is killing people and destroying the planet?
  • When do you plan to stop killing people, destroying the environment and driving species to extinction (i.e. when do you plan to stop emitting CO2)?

Seriously people, the correct order is planet first, then people, then profit.