States, cities, and companies all have a role to play in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, building a clean energy economy, and strengthening resilience against increasing climate risks. In a three-part series of events, C2ES is bringing together these groups to explore opportunities and options for reducing power plant carbon emissions under the Clean Power Plan.
States have a vast array of policy options to consider. We explore how market-based approaches could be used to efficiently and effectively implement the Clean Power Plan, the role of information technology and energy efficiency, and the best models for financing clean energy technology.Solutions Forum Events
Carbon Pricing & Clean Power
April 15, 2015
C2ES brings together state leaders and industry experts to explore market-based approaches to efficiently and effectively implementing EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan.
Carbon Pricing, what are the options?
State Perspectives: Weighing the Options
Part 2: Businesses Perspectives: Carbon Pricing in Practice
Future Solutions Forum Events
Energy efficiency could be the least-cost way for a state to meet its carbon reduction goals under the proposed Clean Power Plan. C2ES has reported that widely deploying information and communications technologies could save billions in energy costs. Join business, state and city leaders exploring options for increasing energy efficiency with information technolog
May 18, 2015
9 a.m. – Noon
101 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20001
Financing Clean Power Technology
Mobilizing clean technologies will require investment. C2ES brings together city, state and business leaders to share ideas on the best ways to finance technology to reduce emissions and be more energy efficient.
June 25, 2015
9 a.m. – Noon
The George Washington University Law School, Lerner Hall, Jacob Burns Moot Courtroom, 2000 H St, NW, Washington, DC 20052
April 19, Jessica Norwood, Sandy Wiggins, and Angie Hawk Maiden shared how to create a local ecosystem to catalyze increased place-based investing to support local businesses and Localist initiatives in your place.Purchase Now!
Recorded April 2015
With new generations of local financial institutions, community foundations, and supportive public policies, pathways have opened for trillions of dollars to move from Wall Street to Main Street. Innovative leaders are changing the way that capital works, moving away from a system that perpetuates inequality and toward place-based models that instead catalyze local job creation, build community wealth, and foster vibrant local economies.
This webinar featured three pioneering local economy leaders who have built ecosystems for place-based investing through community foundation initiatives and local investment clubs. Hear their stories of impact, learn messaging that works in making the case for community capital, and take away concrete ideas for how you can implement similar models in your own community.Who should watch & key takeaways:
Leaders and staff of community development corporations, economic and community development organizations, foundations, and business incubators will learn how to apply these models in their place to leverage assets, access capital, and make the case for community capital and impact investing.
Social entrepreneurs, investors, and leaders looking to support their communities in innovative ways will learn the goals and metrics these new funding models use so they can better position themselves to participate, invest, or attract capital.Speakers:
Jessica Norwood, Emerging ChangeMakers Network, Mobile, AL
Jessica has created a local investing club that helps community members in the Black Belt develop personal wealth while strengthening their local economy. She is a 2014 BALLE Fellow.
Sandy Wiggins, BALLE & RSF Social Finance Community Foundation Circle, Nationwide
Sandy works with community foundations to shift their business models toward increased impact investing. He consults with RSF Social Finance, the Democracy Collaborative, and others across the country and is BALLE’s Board Chair.
Moderator: Angie Hawk Maiden, Appalachian Center For Economic Networks (ACEnet), Athens, OH
Angie runs a CDFI that provides financial services for underserved markets. She is a member of BALLE’s 2013 Fellows cohort.
This webinar was the second of a monthly series shedding light on What Works – eight solutions that together represent the path to real prosperity. The aim of the series is to give Localist leaders tools and insights to build upon proven solutions towards an economy with equity at its core.
See our 2015 At A Glance schedule for more info.
Here are two more items on the endless disputes over sugar intake.
1. The IOM’s 25% of calories from sugar “recommendation”
I was surprised to see the Institute of Medicine’s upper limit of sugar safety cited in a JAMA commentary on sugars and heart disease. The authors disagreed with the conclusions of a study by Yang et al. in JAMA Internal Medicine:
Most US adults consume more added sugar than is recommended for a healthy diet. We observed a significant relationship between added sugar consumption and increased risk for CVD mortality.
The authors of the commentary say:
The relationship between added sugar intake and CVD mortality remains unresolved. The study by Yang et al1 does not support implementation of health policies limiting sugar intake because a relatively small fraction of the total population ingests excessive amounts of sugar by the IOM criteria….Laws attempting to limit excess sugar intake have been passed and overturned on legal grounds. Aside from the legal questions, there is insufficient scientific evidence to support pursuit of policies limiting sugar intake.
They then go on to say:
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendation is that less than 25% of total kilocalories come from added sugar.
Oops. The IOM made no such recommendation.
Instead, the IOM said 25% of calories was the upper limit of safe sugar intake for nutrient deficiencies. The risk of nutrient deficiencies increases above that percentage. That IOM report said nothing about the relationship of sugar quantity to risk of chronic diseases.
Most health authorities recommend no more than 10% of calories from added sugars as a means to reduce the risk of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.
Most research shows that chronic disease risks increase with increasing sugar intake.
2. What is the FDA doing about “Added Sugars” on food labels?
According to all sources, the FDA is still working on what to do about Added Sugars on the new Nutrition Facts panel. It is engaged in two studies of this question.
The FDA was criticized for proposing added sugars on the label without having done the research first. Apparently, the White House Office of Management and Budget took 9 months to approve the FDA’s proposal to do the sugar research. The approval came after the FDA issued its label proposal.
The bottom line on sugar: Less is better.
scientificamerican.com | Article Link | by Elizabeth Harball and ClimateWire
A growing feud over the use of American wood to fuel power production in Europe came into sharp relief yesterday as an environmental group staged a seafaring protest during a forest industry conference.
Participants at this week's Mid-Atlantic Forest Products Conference toured a deepwater export terminal near Norfolk, Va., owned by Enviva LP, a major wood pellet manufacturer and conference sponsor. The tour group was met by about 16 protesters on a party boat circling Enviva's Port of Chesapeake, brandishing a 16-foot banner reading "SOS—Save our Southern Forests" and waving smaller signs that read "Stop Enviva."
Organized by an Asheville, N.C.-based environmental group called the Dogwood Alliance, the protest is the latest move by activists to draw attention to the wood pellet industry's growth in the South, where they allege forests are being chopped down unsustainably so European nations can meet renewable energy targets.
"We shouldn't be exporting our forests to be burned for electricity in the U.K.," Scot Quaranda, a spokesman for the Dogwood Alliance, said before the protest Wednesday. "We need to find more ways to protect and preserve forests."
A spokesman for Enviva declined to comment on the protest. In a statement to ClimateWire, Seth Ginther, executive director of the U.S. Industrial Pellet Association, said, "We are disappointed to see these anti-biomass campaigns continue to spread mis-information about the biomass industry.
"Biomass is sustainably sourced from low-value wood fiber, and from by-products and residues of other forest products industries," Ginther added. "Governments in European countries that are importing biomass for energy have set strict sustainability standards and requirements for biomass, which the industry is meeting through forestry certifications and continuous third-party audits, ensuring the sustainability of the product, as well as providing data on the carbon benefits associated with replacing coal use with biomass."
Image Courtesey of Wikimedia Commons/ Luc Viatour/www.Lucnix.be
forbes.com | Article Link | by Tom Lindsay
There is a variety of opinions in the media these days regarding online learning. Depending on what you read, online education can appear to be either a cure-all or cancer. In an effort to cut through the smoke, here are the top eight established facts you need to know.
1) Online learning is here to stay. Since 1986, when the first online degree program from an accredited institution was offered (by John F. Kennedy University in Orinda, California), growth has been exponential. Today, one-third of America’s 21 million enrolled students are taking some or all of their instruction online. The eleven-year study by the Babson Survey Research Group shows over seven million online enrollments in the fall semester of 2013.
2) There is no significant difference in learning outcomes. Some 30 years of research, including that of the U.S. Department of Education, has found no evidence that online learning is qualitatively inferior to that obtained in a traditional classroom. Unfortunately, those who have preached online learning’s “convenience” for so long have led many to believe that this means “easy,” which is not true. Online courses can be more or less rigorous depending on the instructor who develops the course and the academic department that reviews it.
At the same time, advances in information technology now make it possible to offer significantly more rigorous courses that don’t “feel” as difficult because of the design of the course and the support features that can be directly integrated. For example, one online provider, Excelsior College, sought to address the fact that its students, like most students, live in fear of anything quantitative. In response, Excelsior built access to the Khan Academy‘s tutorials into the lessons for its required courses. The result? Both grades and completion rates went up, with no dumbing-down required.
Image Courtesey of Wikimedia Commons/Everaldo Coelho and YellowIcon
nytimes.com | Article Link | Diane Cardwell
Expanding the notion of corporate benefits beyond discounted health club memberships and low insurance rates, a group of major companies is set to offer employees access to cheaper solar systems for the home.
Under an arrangement announced Wednesday, employees of the companies — Cisco Systems, 3M, Kimberly-Clark and National Geographic — will be able to buy or lease solar systems for their homes at rates substantially lower than the national average, executives said. The program, offered through Geostellar, an online marketer of solar systems, will be available to more than 100,000 employees and will include options for their friends and families in the United States and parts of Canada.
Conceived at the World Wildlife Fund, the program, called the Solar Community Initiative, aims to use the bulk buying power of employees to allow for discounts on home systems.
The program’s expansion is a reflection of the shrinking gulf between camps that were once considered mutually exclusive: environmental advocacy organizations and mainstream corporate America.
“Our objective was to make this as simple and cheap as possible,” said Keya Chatterjee, senior director for renewable energy at the World Wildlife Fund. After receiving discounts through a group program for employees last year, officials at the environmental group approached a few of their corporate partners, she said.
The program is consistent with the group’s approach of working closely with corporations, often quietly trying to nudge them toward change from the inside, rather than pushing from the outside through more confrontational tactics.
Image Couretesy of Wikimedia Commons/ Laslovarga