25% by 2025 Energy Initiative: How are we doing?
25% by 2025 Energy Initiative: How are we doing?
by Jesse Devitte
Posted on 01/20/2010
In May 2007 Governor Lynch signed "The Renewable Energy Act" calling for New Hampshire to obtain 25% of it's energy from clean, renewable sources by the year 2025.
In March 09, recommendations were released for what we need to do to accomplish this 25% by 2025, they were:
1. Maximize energy efficiency in buildings.
2. Increase renewable and low-CO2-emitting sources of energy
in a long-term sustainable manner.
3. Support regional and national actions to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions.
4. Reduce vehicle emissions through state actions.
5. Encourage appropriate land use patterns that enable fewer
vehicle-miles traveled.
6. Reduce vehicle-miles traveled through an integrated multimodal
transportation system.
7. Protect natural resources (land, water, wildlife) to maintain
the amount of carbon fixed or sequestered.
8. Lead by example in government operations.
9. Plan for how to address existing and potential climate
change impacts.
10. Develop an integrated education, outreach and workforce
training program.
I wont break out each of the items that goes with this list as it would make this post very long; but some of the more notable ones are:
- Adopt California Low Emission Vehicle (CALEV) Standards
- Establish an Energy Management Unit to Address State Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
- Create an Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Energy Systems Web Portal
Frankly, some of these seem like softball's to me and not very goal oriented. I mean, Lead by example in government actions?
What do you think? What have you noticed going on around the state?
This is only part I of this, we are going to further analyze this program and hope to hear from many of you if you have noticed any changes!
4 Comments
0 Likes
Leave a Reply by entering your information below or logging in
Quote: So how do we do this? Rail roads? Buses? What do you think?
Perhaps this ties into your blog entry about co-working space. I don't think it's necessary to build expensive, out-dated infrasructure in the information age. Surely, not all jobs are information based but even craftsman use the internet to share ideas, advertise, and sell. In that vein, I'd say build up our information infrastructure and make it less expensive. Businesses surely will be attracted to that.
The NH Climate Action Plan appendices http://des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/air/tsb/... have steps laid out which you may consider actionable. For example in appendix 4.1 it says the mechanism for for CO2 emissions is a combination of outreach, marketing, financial incentives for above code performance, etc. I attended a PUC workshop last week that communicates how to be above code to builders, engineers, and architects. My question is, what else is needed to put the resources in place to carry out each (or most) of these suggested actions?
My take on the CO2 emission controls is that it can't hurt to incorporate this into new buildings and remodels, but to pay for it solely to respond to human induced global warming is not logical. There are good reason to control CO2 emissions in general as it is a waste product and I believe in minimizing all waste. NH taxpayers should be concerned with saving resources (money, materials, effort) by minimizing waste.
Thanks for the comments Jon & Barbara.
Jon - just to play devils advocate for a second here... Where would you assign this money? With the big "Green" push lately what *should* New Hampshire do in your opinion?
Barbara - I know there are some actionable items, it just seems counter productive to assign headers for these initiates that are not goal oriented at all. I agree with your larger point that NH has to be fiscally responsible while implementing this, it is not smart to enforce this on all existing buildings... But as you said, remodels and new buildings.
Although one huge piece of the report cited automotive travel as part of this. New Hampshire is a somewhat segmented state by nature in that you have to get in you car to go most places. So how do we do this? Rail roads? Buses? What do you think?
The objective to reduce CO2 emissions is a fraud. Even if there were global warming (questionable) and if it were caused by human activity (questionable), New Hampshire's CO2 output is so negligible to be totally irrelevant. Why should NH taxpayers and citizens shoulder the bill of a feel-good initiative that has no tangible benefit?
Post new comment