Powered by Max Banner Ads 

Tag Archive: EPA


gaspoweredalarmclock

Gasoline-Powered Alarm Clock, certified by US as EnergyStar compliant

It’s April, but not April 1 (or April Fool’s Day).

We wish it were April Fool’s Day, and we wish this was a fake news story, but instead – it’s a real news story about some fake products getting real EnergyStar certification.

Let us explain.

The United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) sent in 20 applications for the EnergyStar certification.  All 20 applications were for fake products, many of them outlandish devices, as you’ll see below.  15 of the 20 received EnergyStar certifications.

From the recent (March 2010) GAO report:

GAO’s investigation shows that Energy Star is for the most part a self-certification program vulnerable to fraud and abuse. GAO obtained Energy Star certifications for 15 bogus products, including a gas-powered alarm clock. Two bogus products were rejected by the program and 3 did not receive a response. In addition, two of the bogus Energy Star firms developed by GAO received requests from real companies to purchase products because the bogus firms were listed as Energy Star partners. This clearly shows how heavily American consumers rely on the Energy Star brand. The program is promoted through tax credits and appliance rebates, and federal agencies are required to purchase certain Energy Star certified products. In addition, companies use the Energy Star certification to market their products and consumers buy products relying on the certification by the government of reduced energy consumption and costs. For example, in 2008 Energy Star reported saving consumers $19 billion dollars on utility costs.

One of the other products which received a certification was an “air cleaner” – made from a space heater with a feather duster attached to it.  See the actual photo from the GAO application below.

aircleaner

Actual photo submitted by GAO of "Air Cleaner", made from a space heater with a feather duster stuck in the grille. It received EnergyStar certification.

This illustrates the need for more attention to energy and conservation regulation, and the initiation of some new projects in the area of EnergyStar compliance.  Not the hiring of hundreds of bureaucrats in an endless sea of cubicles – just more attention and focus on what should be a key focus of government.

The EPA and DOE did respond to the audit by GAO with this statement.

Read more (and listen to an audio podcast) at the National Public Radio (NPR) link here.   Or, read a Yahoo news release on the subject here.

And remind us to set our gas-powered alarm clock to ridiculous-o’clock!

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 10.0/10 (2 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

economics

While we at EarthPm assert that “a project run with green intent is the right thing to do”, we are also realists.  Businesses cannot stay in business if they constantly lose money on their ventures.  If businesses are to be encouraged to do that right thing, a noble effort, they will also need to “justify” the   bottom-line.  That is why we, along with a lot of other people, say that it is not only the right thing to do, but going green makes cents.

A couple of weeks ago, the Wall Street Journal included a section on the environment, ECO:nomics – Creating Environmental Capital.  In this EarthPM post, we’d like to highlight a couple of the “Best Practices” outlined in the section.  It not only included what works, but also contrasted with what doesn’t work according to some “green leaders”.  For instance, from Steve Fludder, VP Ecomagination, GE (one of the companies featured in our upcoming book), on businesses addressing climate change, a business should “continue to focus on improving your company’s own energy efficiency” (feeds the bottom-line), and “don’t let the current uncertainty over government action become an excuse to stop innovating”.  For financing green projects (of particular interest to us as project managers), Richard Cohen, Managing Director, Environmental Strategic Investment Group, Bank of America, says “create new training and education programs to train the energy work force”, and the current government and regulatory environment “are Byzantine and bureaucratic, and that discourages financing”.  There is much more in this Wall Street Journal section that we find very interesting, including a view from “big oil”, and a top ten ranking of “clean-tech” companies.  Look to future posts for some more information on these and other topics.

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

carpollute2

This is no April Fools!  On April 1, 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation (DOT), in response to an Obama Administration directive, established new, more stringent Federal Rules that “set the first-ever national greenhouse gas emissions standards and will significantly increase the fuel economy of all new passenger cars and light trucks sold in the United States. “  According to Lisa P. Jackson, EPA Administrator, “cleaner car standards will be 950,000,000 tons of pollution cut from our skies. They will mean as much as $3,000 dollars in savings for drivers of 2016 model clean cars. And they will mean $2.3 billion dollars that can stay at home in our economy rather than buying oil from overseas.”  She continued, “. We expect to reduce greenhouse emissions by the equivalent of 42,000,000 cars over the life of the program.”

Basically, the new rules establish more stringent fuel economy standards under several programs including the Clean Air Act for vehicles manufactured for 2012 – 2016 model-years.  It will require automakers to reduce gas emissions by approximately 5% per year and strengthen fuel economy standards to 34.1 mpg average by 2016.

According to the EPA press release, “Climate change is the single greatest long-term global environmental challenge. Cars, SUVs, minivans, and pickup trucks are responsible for almost 60 percent of all U.S. transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions.”

The projects envisioned for this change include those within the auto industry that will ripple throughout the business community; more efficient engine design, new materials for all of the parts that go into making vehicles; glass, structural panels, interior parts, whatever.  Less weight means less energy to push (or pull) the vehicle along, so saving ounces adds up.  I’m sure that you can think of lots more projects that could enhance the vehicle’s performance; tire design, even new design for roads and road materials to make vehicles roll with less friction, new testing equipment and testing facilities.  While something like road design won’t make the vehicle more efficient per sec, in the long run, it may add to the reduction of carbon emissions and the overall point of these regulations.  More importantly to the project manager is the awareness of these problems and drivers of the “Green Wave”, will lead to identification of areas of need a vigilant project manager can step in and manage.  After all, we, as project managers, do want to be leading the charge, not trailing it.  For more information on the new regulations, see: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations.htm

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

President Obama announced yesterday that he would provide$2.3 billion dollars of stimulus money to spur the job market.  That money would be available, in the form of tax credits, to companies, like TPI Composites, a wind turbine company, and other companies for investment in “clean energy” manufacturing initiatives.  The US is being outpaced as a clean energy provider by countries like China, Germany, and Japan.   The competition worldwide, according to the president, is good, but the US

US Environmental Protection Agency

US Environmental Protection Agency

wants to be able to compete, and win.  After all, the US is the leading technological developer of green energy and should be leading the manufacturing as well and not send those jobs overseas.

The stimulus money is intended to provide approximately 17,000 jobs to the US clean energy manufacturing market, to produce products like wind turbines, mentioned before, solar energy equipment, cutting edge batteries to power hybrid automobiles, and harnessing new forms of energy.  There is a hope that this money will help in three ways; reduce our dependency on foreign oil, combat the threat of climate change, and propel US manufacturers to close the clean energy gap and eventually lead the market in production.   The program has been so popular that there are 180 projects being funded in 40 states, and there are many more applicants that money available.  Thus the president is asking Congress for an additional $5 billion dollars in future funding for the program.

The word project is bolded for a reason.  For emphasis, that is $7.2 billion dollars in funding for “green” projects, because whether it is “harnessing new forms of energy” or developing “cutting edge batteries” (new product introduction) or expanding manufacturing capabilities, like TPI Composites, those projects are defined in our upcoming book as “green by definition.”  Like other projects, these will require someone to manage those projects.   We feel that project managers who “view their projects through an environmental lens,” will have an advantage managing all future projects , especially  those that are “green by definition.”

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 10.0/10 (2 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
Powered by WordPress & ecm design