Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Germany Dims Nuclear Plants, but Hopes to Keep Lights On



BIBLIS, Germany — Not since the grim period after World War II has Germany had significant blackouts, but it is now bracing for that possibility after shutting down half its nuclear reactors practically overnight.

Nuclear plants have long generated nearly a quarter of Germany’s electricity. But after the tsunami and earthquake that sent radiation spewing from Fukushima, half a world away, the government disconnected the 8 oldest of Germany’s 17 reactors — including the two in this drab factory town — within days. Three months later, with a new plan to power the country without nuclear energy and a growing reliance on renewable energy, Parliament voted to close them permanently. There are plans to retire the remaining nine reactors by 2022.
As a result, electricity producers are scrambling to ensure an adequate supply. Customers and companies are nervous about whether their lights and assembly lines will stay up and running this winter. Economists and politicians argue over how much prices will rise.
“It’s easy to say, ‘Let’s just go for renewables,’ and I’m quite sure we can someday do without nuclear, but this is too abrupt,” said Joachim Knebel, chief scientist at Germany’s prestigious Karlsruhe Institute of Technology. He characterized the government’s shutdown decision as “emotional” and pointed out that on most days, Germany has survived this experiment only by importing electricity from neighboring France and the Czech Republic, which generate much of their power with nuclear reactors.
Then there are real concerns that the plan will jettison efforts to rein in manmade global warming, since whatever nuclear energy’s shortcomings, it is low in emissions. If Germany, the world’s fourth-largest economy, falls back on dirty coal-burning plants or uncertain supplies of natural gas from Russia, isn’t it trading a potential risk for a real one?
The world is watching Germany’s extreme energy makeover, as politicians from New York to Rome have floated their own plans to shut or shelve reactors.
The International Energy Agency, generally a fan of Germany’s green-leaning energy policy, has been critical. Laszlo Varro, head of the agency’s gas, coal and power markets division, called the plan “very, very ambitious, though it is not impossible, since Germany is rich and technically sophisticated.”
Even if Germany succeeds in producing the electricity it needs, “the nuclear moratorium is very bad news in terms of climate policy,” Mr. Varro said. “We are not far from losing that battle, and losing nuclear makes that unnecessarily difficult.”
The government counters that it is prepared to make huge investments in improving energy efficiency in homes and factories as well as in new clean power sources and transmission lines. So far, there have been no blackouts.
But Jürgen Grossmann, chief executive of the German energy giant RWE, which owns two closed reactors here in Biblis, about 40 miles south of Frankfurt, expressed skepticism. “Germany, in a very rash decision, decided to experiment on ourselves,” he said. “The politics are overruling the technical arguments.”
The Nuclear Equation
Germany’s planners believed they could forgo nuclear energy in large part because of the country’s remarkable progress in renewable energy, which now accounts for 17 percent of its electricity output, a number the government estimates will double in 10 years. On days when the offshore wind turbines spin full tilt, Germany produces more electricity from renewable sources than it uses, according to European energy monitors.
Germany has “exceeded everyone’s expectations on renewable power,” said Mr. Varro, showing that it could be cost effective and reliable.
Until it closed the reactors, Germany was Europe’s leading energy exporter.
With a total of 133 gigawatts of installed generating capacity in place at the start of this year, “there was really a huge amount of space to shut off nuclear plants,” Harry Lehmann, a director general of the German Federal Environment Agency and one of Germany’s leading policy makers on energy and environment, said of the road map he helped develop. The country needs about 90.5 gigawatts of generating capacity on hand to fill a typical national demand of about 80 gigawatts a day. So the 25 gigawatts that nuclear power contributed would not be missed — at least within its borders.
To be prudent, the plan calls for the creation of 23 gigawatts of gas- and coal-powered plants by 2020. Why? Because renewable plants don’t produce nearly to capacity if the air is calm or the sky is cloudy, and there is currently limited capacity to store or transport electricity, energy experts say.
New coal and gas plants will use the cleanest technology available and should not aggravate climate change, government officials said, because they will operate within the European carbon-trading system in which plants that exceed the allowed emissions cap have to buy carbon credits from companies whose activities are environmentally beneficial, thus evening out the environmental ledger.
Electricity prices are expected to rise by 35 to 40 euros ($50 to $60) per household each year, or less than 5 percent, the government estimates. Though nuclear energy generally costs less than newer options, German law has long stipulated that renewable energy must be purchased first even if it is costlier.
But skeptics consider government assumptions overly optimistic. Stefan Martus, the mayor of Philippsburg, says he believes energy costs could rise more dramatically than government estimates; the price of permits to offset dirty power plants is highly unpredictable and variable, like the value of stocks. And the International Energy Agency does not think Germany — or any other country — will be able to reduce its emissions at a reasonable cost without nuclear power.
Energy agency officials also question predictions that electricity use will decline an additional 10 percent over the next decade given the projected expansion of electric growth of the German economy. The average German family already uses only about half the electricity of its American equivalent.
“Yes, there is German angst about nuclear power,” said Hildegard Cornelius-Gaus, the mayor of Biblis. ”But if you phrased the question, ‘Would you want to phase out nuclear energy if it cost massively more and you risk blackouts?’ the answer would be very different.”
An Ambivalent History
Even before Fukushima, nuclear energy’s days in Germany were numbered. Biblis had been the site of giant national antinuclear demonstrations, and Germany was already enacting a plan for slowly phasing out nuclear energy by 2023. The country had become the world leader in wind power and a master at squeezing more energy efficiency out of appliances and homes, having built tens of thousands of self-heating “passive houses.”
Still, Chancellor Angela Merkel, herself a physicist, decided last fall to extend the operating licenses of Germany’s nuclear plants over concerns that innovation alone would not satisfy the country’s energy appetite.
Fukushima changed everything.
That Japan is a technologically advanced country made the nuclear accident more alarming to the German people than the Chernobyl disaster, at an old Soviet reactor. Despite that, industry experts and residents of reactor towns like Biblis and nearby Philippsburg were stunned by the suddenness of the about-face.
Both towns will lose hundreds of jobs and millions in tax revenue.
German energy companies say they have been handed a national energy template that looks good on paper but is technically challenging. Although the country’s production of energy is bounteous, they say it is not always available where and when it is needed. Northern Germany has offshore wind and coal deposits, but southern Germany — a manufacturing epicenter that is home to Mercedes, BMW and Audi — has no plentiful local fuel source other than nuclear. Germany’s current grid is highly decentralized, lacking high-voltage transmission lines to move electricity over long distances.
“Now, with the nuclear shut down, we have a very difficult task,” said Joachim Vanzetta, head of transmission system operations at Amprion, the largest of the country’s four grid operators.
Amprion had already started working toward a renewable future with no nuclear power, planning for 500 miles of new transmission lines to bring electricity from north to south that would cost $4.3 billion and take 10 to 15 years to build. At most, 40 miles of lines have been completed.
The country has also been pouring money into biomass plants and solar installations — millions of panels now sit on German roofs and fields. Despite recent technological improvements, solar electricity is still far more expensive to generate than wind, gas or nuclear power. And output can be highly seasonal.
Germany’s hope that gas and coal plants will temporarily replace some of the lost nuclear generation may be hard to fulfill — power companies remain lukewarm about building them especially given the German policy of buying “clean” energy first. “Few operators will be willing to build a power plant in a form that may ultimately only run a couple of hundred hours a year,” Mr. Grossman of RWE said.
This winter, Amprion predicts its grid will have 84,000 megawatts of electricity at its disposal, to provide 81,000 megawatts needed for consumption — an uncomfortably slim margin of safety, Mr. Vanzetta said. In prior years, electricity was readily available for purchase on the European grid if the price was right. But exported German power is what helped keep France glowing in winter.
“At the moment, we have a stressed system, but it’s under control,” Mr. Vanzetta said. “If we have days with no wind and no solar and can’t buy energy from abroad, then there is the risk of blackouts.

Sunday, August 28, 2011

Portland Plans for Transit All Powered by Electricity



Hans van der Meer
FULLY COVERED A new solar-powered charging station in Portland, Ore., can also supply power to the electrical grid.
PORTLAND, Ore. To drivers passing by on Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, the structure rising above the parking lot is mostly unremarkable. But to the eco-elites who gathered in this green-leaning city in June for its unveiling, it represented a blueprint for the filling station of the future.
The roof of the 12-foot-tall steel canopy, built by EV4 Oregon, is covered with solar cells that generate power for a pair of ECOtality Blink Level 2 electric-vehicle chargers at the base. The facility is connected to the electrical grid, so any excess electricity from the solar cells can be sent to the local utility.
The canopy is more than just a sunny-day design: other installations will include an underground bank of batteries to store electricity for distribution after dark. As the electric vehicle population grows, more canopies can be added to create a covered parking lot.
“This is the future, my friends, and it will make a difference,” said Jeff Cogen, chairman of the Multnomah County Commission and one of several dignitaries to attend the ribbon-cutting ceremony. “Hopefully, in 20 years, we can look back and say, ‘I remember when these were introduced.’ ”
With major automakers like General Motors and Nissan now selling plug-in vehicles, charging stations like this one are seen as a vital element in persuading drivers to adopt zero-pollution cars. Without a convenient place to replenish batteries away from home, electric cars would be a hard sell for consumers.
And finally coming online after years of false starts and schedule delays — even in a city that presents itself as a hub for all things electric — these chargers are a welcome sign that the logjams holding back the acceptance of electric cars may at last be breaking up.
Rather than just promote electric vehicles and the installation of charging spots, a coalition of government officials, carmakers, academics and local utilities is trying to integrate all forms of electric transportation into the city.
“Electric vehicles are just a part of the way we’re going to make cities smarter and more efficient,” said Deena Platman, a transportation planner at Metro, the regional planning agency. “It’s the next evolution in sustainability in the city.”
In many ways, electric vehicles are a good fit in Portland. The city is compact enough that the average day’s driving of most households, about 20 miles, is easily covered on a single battery charge. Three-quarters of the state’s residents live along the Interstate 5 corridor between Portland and Eugene, two hours south. Oregon also relies heavily on hydroelectric power, which produces no direct carbon emissions.
Portland has a dense street-car and light-rail network, and the city has the country’s highest per-capita ownership of Toyota Prius hybrids, according to George Beard, a manager in the Office of Research and Strategic Partnerships at Portland State University.
Portland’s embrace of all things electric is one reason why Toyota chose it as one of the cities where it is testing its new plug-in hybrid Prius, which is expected to be introduced in 2012. Green Lite, a local start-up, is creating a plug-in hybrid prototype that it says gets 100 miles per gallon. Eaton, an automotive supplier and infrastructure company, plans to build fast chargers at its plant in Wilsonville, south of Portland.
“Eaton Corporation is working to expand the electric vehicle charging infrastructure and ensure that drivers of these vehicles have the peace of mind they need when commuting,” said Tom Schafer, vice president and general manager of Eaton’s Commercial Distribution Products Division. 
These and other companies in Oregon are trying to tackle a key challenge to the electrification of the vehicle fleet: how to install enough chargers so drivers can get past their concerns of finding charging stations away from home.
Installing a charger in a homeowner’s garage is relatively straightforward. Putting chargers on public property is more complex. Who, for example, will install and maintain the chargers? How much will the electricity cost? Who is responsible if pedestrians trip over electric cords? How much should electric vehicles pay to park at chargers?
“The issues are insane,” said Mark Gregory, an associate vice president of finance and administration at Portland State University, which is part of the coalition studying various issues. “In two years, we hope to answer these questions.”
One laboratory for exploring these issues is a short walk from Mr. Gregory’s office. A one-block stretch of downtown, nicknamed Electric Avenue, was conceived as an oasis for all types of electric vehicles, and a vision of how these vehicles can fit into a broader transportation system. Indeed, the avenue runs adjacent to a transit mall on Sixth Avenue where buses, street cars and the light-rail network converge, making it a vibrant hub for residents on their way to work, class or a shop or restaurant.
Electric Avenue’s power lines, buried under the street, will provide the electricity for eight chargers made by seven different companies. Drivers pay normal parking rates, and the electricity for their vehicles is free, subsidized for two years by Portland State University. In all, the installation cost about $80,000.
“We are trying to figure out how to meld it into the urban landscape,” said Mr. Beard of Portland State, which spearheaded the Electric Avenue project with the city and Portland General Electric, the local utility. “We want to capture data on vehicles and chargers and gauge the public’s interest.”
The findings from the Electric Avenue study will complement a $100 million federally financed project to install 1,100 public chargers around the state. About 100 of the chargers have been installed, though the project is about a year behind schedule.
The ultimate goal, though, is to make available more of the direct-current fast chargers that will replenish a battery in half an hour or less. A handful already exist in Portland, and the Oregon Department of Transportation has chosen AeroVironment, of Monrovia, Calif., to install another 22 of these fast chargers. But because there is not yet a uniform standard for their plugs, their introduction has been slower.
At least in Portland, where the appetite for electric vehicles is strong, the fast chargers cannot come soon enough.
“We’re idled at the green light of opportunity,” Mr. Beard said.
A version of this article appeared in print on August 28, 2011, on page AU2 of the New York edition with the headline: Portland Plans for Transit All Powered by Electricity.

Energy-efficient homes seem to sell faster, fetch higher prices


Some research projects in California, Oregon and Washington offer hints that energy efficiency and sustainability certifications for homes may result in easier sales and higher prices.

Home energy efficiency and sustainability have been major policy priorities for the Obama administration, but lurking in the background are two consistent questions: Beyond the documentable savings on utility bills, do such steps add to the resale value of a home? And do they make it easier or faster to sell your property?
Housing groups and housing officials say that definitive statistical data covering multiple regions of the country are scarce. But some localized research projects in Oregon, Washington and California offer promising hints.
In a study covering existing and new houses sold from May 2010 through April of this year, the Earth Advantage Institute, a nonprofit group based in Portland, Ore., found that newly constructed homes with third-party certifications for sustainability and energy efficiency sold for 8% more on average than noncertified homes in the six-county Portland metropolitan area. Existing houses with certifications sold for 30% more.
The raw sales data in the study were provided by the Portland Regional Multiple Listing Service. "Certified" houses were defined as those carrying Energy Star or LEED for Homes designations or Earth Advantage home certifications. (LEED stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design.) The latest study was the fourth in an annual series conducted by Earth Advantage, each of which has shown clear price premiums for certified houses.
But officials caution that using average sales prices pulled from MLS data without trying to measure "comparable" homes against one another directly may not be conclusive. For instance, newly constructed certified houses may be more expensive to start, and existing certified homes may be larger and more likely to be in higher-cost neighborhoods where homeowner adoption rates for energy-efficiency measures are higher.
Nonetheless, said Dakota Gale, Earth Advantage's manager of sustainable finance, looking back at four years of studies, "we can still see a consistent trend that third-party certification continues to result in a higher sales price, even during the past year when home sales were down."
A study conducted two years ago by the institute in Seattle and Portland identified what may be another plus: Homes marketed with energy-efficiency certifications appear to sell faster on average than those without. The study tried to come up with rough comparability in appraisal terms between certified and noncertified properties, and it found that in Portland, certified homes spent 18 days less time on the market after listing than noncertified counterparts. In both Portland and Seattle, researchers documented price premiums — 9.6% in Seattle, 4.2% in Portland — in a statistical analysis with a 95% confidence level.
A recent study on houses in San Diego and Sacramento published by the National Bureau of Economic Research took a different tack: When you install photovoltaic solar panels on your roof, how much do you get back in market resale terms, beyond monthly energy savings?
Researchers examined a sample of home sales in the $500,000 range in both metropolitan areas between 2003 and 2010 and found that, on average, solar panel installations cost owners $35,967. But with federal and state subsidies, the net average cost came down to $20,892. This net expenditure, in turn, yielded an increase in appraised value by $20,194 — a 97% rate of recovery on the investment.
Though less than 100%, the rate is much higher than most home improvements in the most recent "Cost vs. Value" study conducted by Remodeling magazine — well above major kitchen and bathroom renovations.
Kevin Morrow, senior program manager for green building at the National Assn. of Home Builders, says that although many newly constructed homes come with energy and sustainability certifications, banks don't necessarily recognize their value when it comes to providing mortgage money.
For example, bank underwriters often do not include reduced monthly utility costs in the household income/household expense ratios that affect the maximum mortgage amounts available to buyers.
"The case needs to be made" to lenders, he said, "that, hey, these houses will cost less to operate, so they should be worth more."
Morrow added that appraisers are part of the issue as well if they don't have the training to recognize and credit extra value to houses that have money-saving solar installations, geothermal heating and cooling, Energy Star appliances, water conservation features and other green improvements.
The Appraisal Institute, the largest group representing that industry, says it has sponsored "green" appraisal courses for 2,300 appraisers during the last two years. It says it strongly supports efforts to better incorporate energy and environmental factors into mortgage underwriting and home valuations, including a possible congressional mandate requiring it.
http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/la-fi-harney-20110828,0,111611.story

Con Ed 'optimistic' no Lower Manhattan shutdown


NEW YORK — A spokeswoman says Con Edison is "cautiously optimistic" that it won' t have to turn off power to about 17,000 people at the southern tip of Manhattan. The area encompasses the nation's financial capital, ground zero and the luxury high-rise apartments of Battery Park City.
The utility had considered a shutdown to protect its underground equipment if Tropical Storm Irene pushed seawater over a flood wall and swamped the area. But flooding there has been minimal.
Spokeswoman Sara Banda says "the situation is looking better and better" in lower Manhattan, but Con Ed is still watching conditions there. She says the utility's focus is shifting to other areas, where overhead power lines have been damaged.
About 95,000 Con Ed customers are without power in the city and suburbs.

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP79038149617c41cfa0db223ab58355f6.html

Saturday, August 27, 2011

Con Ed’s Decision on Shutdown Likely Sunday Morning


Wall Street Journal


Power could be shut off in Lower Manhattan — specifically hitting Wall Street — as a precaution against storm surges as Hurricane Irene strikes, authorities said. A final decision will likely come Sunday morning.
Consolidated Edison Co., the power company for about 3.3 million buildings, homes and businesses in the New York City area, estimated Saturday afternoon that 6,500 downtown customers, all south of the Brooklyn Bridge, could face a preemptive shutdown as early as Sunday morning.
John Miksad, Con Edison’s senior vice president of electric operations, said the utility is particularly concerned about the financial industry and has reached out to Wall Street firms about the potential shutdown.
“The New York Stock Exchange, and all the exchanges, have power generation on site that they could run,” he said. “We’ve actually reached out to them to sort of get a better understanding of what else we could do to support that. And, again, all of this is worst-case scenario, assuming the storm and the tides align (and) we need to make that decision.”
Con Ed has already made the decision to turn off part of the city’s underground steam system, a move that affects 50 customers along 10 miles out of the 110-mile network. These customers, most living downtown, would lose hot water as a result.
As for the 6,500 customers most in danger of a preemptive power shutdown, Mr. Miksad predicted a decision on that front would be made around 8 a.m. Sunday.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg, at a news conference Saturday, said people in Lower Manhattan should expect to have their power turned off.

No Plans to Cut Power in Lower Manhattan, Con Edison Says

August 27, 2011, 12:41 PM
If a shutdown of those substations did become necessary, the affected area would be the southeastern tip of Manhattan, bordered by the Brooklyn Bridge on the north, Broadway on the west and the East River on the south and east, said Chris Olert, a spokesman for Con Ed.
Mr. Olert said about 6,400 customers, including some large office buildings and multidwelling apartment houses, might potentially lose power in that scenario.
In a news conference earlier on Saturday, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg warned of the specter of an electrical shutdown in parts of downtown Manhattan because of the vulnerability of low-lying Con Edison substations.
“It’s conceivable that in downtown Manhattan, for example, there will be no electricity, as well as a lot of water in the streets,” the mayor said.
A shutdown in the area would occur only if a substation were flooded during the storm, Mr. Olert said. Such action would be taken to prevent more severe damage to electrical circuits and to allow power to be restored more quickly once the storm had passed.
But the utility is far more concerned with the overhead electrical wires on Staten Island and in Queens, the Bronx and parts of Westchester County, Mr. Olert said. Con Ed will be closely tracking wind conditions in those areas, and it has warned residents to look out for, and stay away from, any downed wires.
As for Lower Manhattan, Mr. Olert said, “we are not doing any shutdowns today, unless something erupts.”

Power Substations in Manhattan Are Seen as Vulnerable to Flooding, Officials Say



New York Times

A slice of Manhattan’s southeastern tip may be especially vulnerable to a loss of electricity from Hurricane Irene, Consolidated Edison said Saturday, and officials at the public utility said it could be forced to pre-emptively shut off power in low-lying parts of New York City. 

Some substations along the waterline of Lower Manhattan could be susceptible to severe flooding if the Hudson and East Rivers rise significantly because of the storm, said Chris Olert, a Con Edison spokesman.
If shut down, the substation — core power grids similar to the circuit panel in a home — would leave more than 6,000 buildings without power in an area south of the Brooklyn Bridge and east of lower Broadway, bounded by the East River, Mr. Olert said.
The affected customers might include large office buildings, including some banks, and apartment houses. In the worst-case situation, Con Ed workers could take two to three days to restore power, raising the possibility that the city’s financial sector would find it difficult to resume business on Monday.
The utility acknowledged that a fierce flood of storm water, particularly if aligned with high tide, would force workers to shut down power stations in low-lying parts of the city. Officials said that no decision was expected until early Sunday.
In a news conference, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg warned of the specter of an electrical shutdown in the utility’s vulnerable districts. “It’s conceivable that in downtown Manhattan, for example, there will be no electricity, as well as a lot of water in the streets,” he said.
A shutdown in Manhattan, where the company’s cables and pipes mostly run beneath the streets, would prevent more severe damage to electrical circuits and allow power to be restored more quickly once the storm passes. Still, while the utility was monitoring water levels in Lower Manhattan, officials said they were more concerned about damage to the overhead electrical wires that provide power to Staten Island and parts of the Bronx, Queens and Westchester County.
By Saturday afternoon, Con Ed officials said they had seen no sign of strains to the city’s electrical grid. But the utility did act to shut off steam from 10 miles of its 110-mile underground steam system in Manhattan. Some 50 customers south of 14th Street, including offices, banks and some public housing complexes, would lose hot water as a result.
More than 400 backup crews from states as far as Colorado and Texas traveled to New York to assist Con Edison. About 1,700 of the utility’s workers are on hand over the weekend to assess and repair damage.
The utility has sandbagged some of its low-lying properties and is using security cameras to check on water levels around the ring of Lower Manhattan.
Reporting for the hurricane coverage was contributed by Matt Flegenheimer, Christine Haughney, Thomas Kaplan, Anna M. Phillips, Liz Robbins, Noah Rosenberg, Fernanda Santos and Tim Stelloh.

Monday, August 15, 2011

In Auto Test in Europe, Meter Ticks Off Miles, and Fee to Driver


EINDHOVEN, the Netherlands — As Sander Van Dedem recalled watching the charges tick up every 10 seconds on the dashboard meter on the way to the airport, he resolved to try public transportation next time.  “Looking at the money makes you realize that a car isn’t always a good idea,” said Mr. Van Dedem, a commercial sales manager for I.B.M. here.
But his pricey ride was not in a taxi. He was driving his own Volvo XC60.
The car had been outfitted with the meter so that Mr. Van Dedem could take part in a trial of a controversial government tax proposal to charge drivers a fee for the miles they drive. The meter also factors in the cost to society in the form of pollution, traffic congestion, greenhouse gas emissions and wear and tear on roads.
Hooked up to the Internet wirelessly and to GPS, the system tabulates a charge for each car trip by using a mileage-based formula that also takes account of a car’s fuel efficiency, the time of day and the route. (Driving on busier thoroughfares costs more than driving on less-traveled roads.) At the end of each month, the vehicle’s owner would receive a bill detailing times and costs of usage, not unlike a cellphone bill, although participants in the trial did not have to pay the charges.
Governments in car-clogged regions of Europe, Asia and even the United States have shown an eagerness to explore such systems, but they face a nagging challenge in placing them in private vehicles. Even in environmentally conscious places like the Netherlands, voters and politicians often vehemently oppose the programs, citing privacy concerns about the monitoring of drivers’ whereabouts and the introduction of what amounts to a new type of tax.
In the Netherlands, where by some accounts residents have the highest average commuting time in Europe and a reputation for receptivity to environmental innovation, the government had planned to institute a nationwide system next year.  But the plan was shelved when a new government came to power in 2010.
“The winning party said, ‘If you elect us, there won’t be new taxes,’ and killed the plan,” said Ab Oosting, a city official in Eindhoven. 
Supporters of the meters contend that the charges are more equitable than current taxes like automobile purchase and registration fees, because they derive from actual use rather than mere ownership. If imposed, they could supplant gas and vehicle taxes as well as tolls. Governments could program  computers to require consistent gas guzzlers to pay higher rates, for example. 
Distance charging also provides a means of replacing declining revenues from gasoline taxes as more people drive highly efficient, hybrid or electric cars, helping governments that have traditionally depended on gas taxes for road upkeep. 
Equally important, studies have found that the meters provide instantaneous negative feedback, the kind that psychologists say changes behavior.
“At the beginning you’re looking at it all the time and thinking of costs, and pretty quickly it starts to influence what you do,” said Mr. Van Dedem, whose rush-hour airport ride would have incurred a charge of just over $5 under the rates proposed in the Netherlands.
The effect has been lasting: even though the trial was two years ago and the meter has been removed, he now works from home more in the mornings and walks to the market, he said.
In Europe, countries like Germany and Denmark “were looking to the Netherlands to test the technology” and were disappointed when the plan was shelved, said Peder Jensen, a transportation expert at the European Environment Agency. Germany has already started using a GPS-based charging system for trucks, and France is planning to do so, a step that is less politically volatile than charging drivers of private cars.
In the United States, states including Oregon, Texas and Minnesota have explored mileage charging systems, but the first tentative proposals have faced obstacles there as well. A longstanding proposal in Oregon to introduce such charging for electric cars stalled in committee this spring and never made it to a vote. It suggested a transitional rate of 0.85 cents per mile in 2015 and 1.85 cents per mile by 2018. 
Although the program was primarily an attempt to recoup lost revenue from gasoline taxes, it was also intended to test the waters for distance charging that would eventually apply to all cars.
“We started with a new type of car where the policy argument was clear: electric vehicles don’t pay gas taxes,” said James M. Whitty, manager of Oregon’s Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding. “But the idea was to get by the anxiety about what the new tax system was about, to see if it would be acceptable.”
The Oregon proposal did not envisage installing real-time GPS-based meters in each car, but merely recording the mileage though the odometer. An earlier trial using a GPS unit had stirred a public outcry even though the unit did not reveal locations as it relayed data to the state.  “The public didn’t trust that,” Mr. Whitty said.
Eric-Mark Huitema, a transportation specialist with I.B.M., which developed the system used in the Netherlands in collaboration with the semiconductor company NXP, said that the hardware and software performed well in the testing period.  
“The trials work well, but it’s first a psychological issue and second a political choice,” he said. “To do it you need support of the government, and it needs to happen when there is not an election because there’s always a bit of resistance.”
Under the shelved plan in the Netherlands, rates would have varied from 4.5 to 45 cents per mile. Government studies predicted that 60 or 70 percent of drivers would pay less than under the current system of car taxation.
The European Union continues to prod member states to try distance charging despite the setbacks. High car and gas taxes have failed to stem the growth of car use in Western Europe, leaving densely populated countries paralyzed at rush hour.
Belgium plans to start a small trial of 50 drivers in September. “Traffic jams are expected to double by 2020; the roads are full, full, full,” said Freidl Maertens, director of the pilot program in Leuven, Belgium. Singapore is also contemplating a mileage-based tax system, though so far the plans do not include a digital display, which some experts see as a crucial component.
According to data collected in the Eindhoven trial, watching the small charges add up changed driving habits.
“Seeing the meter helps,” Mr. Huitema said. “The old taxes don’t do that — you fill the tank, pay and try not to worry anymore.”

Friday, August 05, 2011

Thursday, August 04, 2011

London homes to get free energy efficiency assessment



Continue 
About 55,000 homes in London are to get a free energy efficiency assessment which could lead to large reductions in residents' bills.
The RE:NEW programme follows a trial in nearly 9,000 homes, in which homeowners made savings of up to £154.
The scheme sees a report made of your home and a number of devices, such as low energy light bulbs and radiator panels, being installed for free.
Funded by the mayor of London, it runs until May 2012.
It also hopes to reduce fuel poverty by making sure householders are getting all the benefits and grants they are entitled to.
'Good economic sense'
Where appropriate, more substantial measures, such as loft and cavity wall insulation, will be offered.
These will be subsidised for those able to pay and free for those on qualifying benefits.
The project is supported by the Energy Saving Trust and the 32 London boroughs.

Start Quote

This will save millions off fuel bills and fundamentally improve quality of life for Londoners”
Boris JohnsonMayor of London
London Mayor Boris Johnson said: "Cutting energy waste at a time of rising costs makes good economic sense and it benefits the environment by reducing carbon dioxide.
"I am determined to make buildings more efficient on an unprecedented scale to create jobs in a low carbon economy.
"This will save millions off fuel bills and fundamentally improve quality of life for Londoners."
Philip Sellwood, chief executive of the Energy Saving Trust, said: "The most successful energy efficiency programmes taken on area-by-area are those that offer something for everyone and where measures are installed on an individual, tailored basis.
"RE:NEW fits the bill on all counts - any householder, renting or owning, can benefit, and only the measures that will deliver carbon and bill savings for a given home will be considered."
RE:NEW teams are working in selected areas starting with the boroughs of Barking & Dagenham, Hackney and Waltham Forest.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14399271