Al Weinrub

Badges? We don't need them to pursue clean energy

Mexican character actor Alfonso Bedoya delivered what may be one of the most frequently misquoted lines of all time.

The movie in which he delivered it is "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre" and stars Humphrey Bogart and Walter Huston. Bedoya played an unnamed bandit, listed in the credits as Gold Hat.

But in my mind he stole the movie with the line, "Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges."

To some degree, those of us toiling away to make clean energy a viable and stable industry share a lot of similarities with Fred Dobbs, Bogart's character in the 1948 film. Dobbs meets up with the grizzled prospector Howard, played by Huston, down in Tampico, Mexico about 1925.

Together they go off in search of gold.

Clean energy gold rush

Sounds familiar. The gold this time around is the free energy around us on a daily basis. There's enough gold in them thar hills, I mean solar energy emanating from the center of our system to provide more than enough energy the world could consume. We just have to find the means to harvest that energy without breaking the bank and do it cheaper than we can by either digging coal out of the ground or sucking and processing crude oil.

No problem. Dobbs did find his gold. But bandits, most notably Gold Hat, and the realities of the desert made realizing that dream difficult. Of course there was the greed. I watched the scene in which Dobbs turns crazy for his riches with horror. I was a kid with my friend Torg in the University of Alaska's Schiable Hall on a crazy cold winter night in Fairbanks, wondering how it could be hot any place in the world.

The treasure in the case of clean energy is right in front of us. I found this bit of data at amercianenergyindependence.com: "All of California's electricity can be produced from 200 square miles of sunshine; 128,000 acres of desert land." The author of the piece helps the reader visualize that space by saying Lake Mead, behind Hoover Dam, covers more than 200 square miles.

Challenge can be met

That's pretty straightforward math. The challenge is harnessing that energy, storing it for use during evening hours and creating an energy grid able to adapt to the ebbs and flows of a renewable energy reality.

It all boils down to innovation and know how. The April 2012 report, Beyond Boom & Bust, says the only solution is "to drive innovation and cost declines so that clean energy technologies can ultimately thrive on their own in American markets without subsidy."

The cost of fossil fuels is assisting that quest. So is climate change. But it can't be done without help.

Innovators wanted

Clean energy does have heroes -- adventurous types, who like Dobbs go out in search of riches. Art Rosenfeld comes to mind. He's father of the Rosenfeld Effect, which refers to how installing efficiency basically pays for future energy uses. As a member of the California Energy Commission, he applied the ground-breaking policy to the state and enabled it to save enough energy to avoid having to build far more electrical generation plants.

Another standout is Amory Lovins, chief scientist at the Rocky Mountain Institute, who has packaged his ideas for a fossil-free future in his latest project, dubbed "Reinventing Fire." The concept is to divest the economy completely of crude oil and coal by 2050, using private enterprise to do it.

There's also sustainable energy advocate and writer Al Weinrub. He argues that decentralized energy, or putting renewable systems in as many places in a community as possible, generates wealth, spurs economic revitalization and helps adapt to climate change.

And there are many thousands more, people like Pete Moe, who helped organize the energy efficient auto segment of Fresno Earth Day 2012, or Connie Young, who convinced me to answer potential questions after the screening of "Your Environmental Road Trip." The documentary chronicles a group of friends going to every state in the Union to find the most interesting clean energy innovators. (Shameless plug: The event is planned for 6 p.m. April 21, a Saturday, at the Unitarian Universalist Church, 2672 E. Alluvial Ave., between Chestnut and Willow avenues, in Clovis.)

Credentials come with results

This all boils down to that infamous line of Bedoya's. When Gold Hat is taken to task by Dobbs for not having any credentials, he takes offense. After all, he wants the prize as much as Dobbs.

Heck, we all do. Being able to see the Sierra in summer would be phenomenal here in the San Joaquin Valley. Currently, a thick haze blankets that view. I'd prefer cleaner air and an unabstructed look at the mountains naturalist John Muir routinely hiked in and thought of as beautiful.

I was inspired to write this post by Jim Beaver of imdb.com who wrote hundreds of bios on obscure actors, honoring their work and illuminating for fans like me the people behind celluloid memories. Beaver's research revealed the man behind the line, a guy who had the same dreams as the rest of us, pursuing a better life.

Alfonso Bedoya, Gold Hat

Here's some of Beaver's entry: Bedoya "achieved his greatest success in U.S. films. He was born in a tiny village in Mexico and he had a nomadic upbringing, living in numerous places throughout the country including, for a time, Mexico City. He received a private education in Houston, Texas as a teenager, but dropped out and roamed about doing an assortment of jobs. His family, however, brought him back to Mexico City, where he subsequently found work in the struggling Mexican film industry.


"He appeared in many Mexican films before director John Huston offered him the role of Gold Hat in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948). Bedoya stole the scenes in which he appeared as the smiling cutthroat and delivered the famous line about not needing any 'stinking badges.' He made a number of popular films in the U.S. in the next nine years, but a drinking problem destroyed his health. He died at the age of 53," the same year Bogart died.

Make my day: 7 reasons to be encouraged about clean energy

The economy may look like it's been on the losing end of a street brawl, but optimism could be lurking in the shadows.

Certainly the mood is glum. The news, when it isn't fixating on celebrity missteps or political scandal, highlights Greek default, an irritated 99 percent and prospects for job creation that appear as likely as J. Edgar Hoover returning to run the FBI.

Maybe I'm biased or I'm watching too many trailers for the new Clint Eastwood film. But I'm seeing things differently.

Perhaps it's just me, or my co-worker Sandy Nax. But we're seeing some pretty positive stuff coming from our perch in the green energy sector.

Reason No.1: Solar flare. Here's a landmark. A San Jose Mercury News post San Jose Mercury Newsmarks the achievement of California reaching 1 gigawatt of installed solar. As reporter Dana Hull says, it's 1,000 megawatts and "roughly the size of two coal-fired power plants."

Sun is good. Coal not so much, even though it's a domestic energy source. Regardless, the news is huge. And solar growth is expected to continue. The reason some solar manufacturers -- think failed Solyndra for a moment -- are having a tough time doesn't have much to do with popularity of the renewable energy.

There's nothing wrong with sales. It's price that's killing these companies. As predicted, the cost of solar and wind prices have dropped, nearing ever closer to energy produced by fossil fuels. Parity it's called.

And it can't come too soon.

Solar is dominating my interest lately partly because I've been swayed by an argument by Derek Abbott, a professor at the University of Adelaide in Australia. In a series of YouTube posts, he argues that enough energy from the sun could be easily captured to power the world's energy need of 15 terawatts.

Abbott believes solar thermal is the best option as it is the cleanest to produce. It requires no photovoltaic panels just mirrors and a system for superheating a substance to produce heat and subsequently energy.

Job rating: Excellent.

Reason No. 2: Concentrated or thermal solar. And that leads to this forecast from CleanTechies.com that concentrated solar is on the verge of becoming a serious contender in the clean energy spectrum. The piece says concentrated solar's simplicity will help sell it to consumers. "Solar thermal has been around for decades and is extremely reliable," CleanTechies says.

The positives are similar to those across the green energy spectrum: Costs are decreasing, state and local governments are getting interested in assisting projects, systems can be applied to commercial buildings, cooling is an option (although I'm still uncertain how that works), more people are getting into the business and innovation is making systems better.

Job rating: There's potential.

Reason No. 3: Solar mountain. Got a landfill? Who doesn't? They're not pretty. However, in Conley, Ga. Republic Services has transformed 9 million cubic yards of trash into a solar energy farm. The solid waste company covered the massive hill of garbage with a geomembrane on which it attached thin-film solar panels.

The panels produce 1 megawatt, but more could be added, according to Silvio Marcacci at cleantechnica.com. The site is one of just a few in the country. However, its success could drive more to adopt the concept.

"A lot of these landfills are built in urban settings, and they’re close to transmission lines," Tony Walker of Republic Services tells Marcacci. “We think this type of system can be built across the country."

Maybe so. There certainly is a lot of garbage.

Job rating: Fermenting.


Reason No. 4: Decentralized energy. I first read of this concept after stumbling across a report by sustainable energy advocate and writer Al Weinrub. He argues that decentralized energy, or putting renewable systems in as many places in a community as possible, generates wealth, spurs economic revitalization and helps adapt to climate change.

Steven Cohen, executive director of Columbia University's Earth Institute, says in a piece on Huffington Post that decentralized and renewable energy are the key to solving the looming crisis of sustainability. He says that a massive public-private partnership is needed to develop smart-grid, distributed generation technology via tax credit and other government and private sector driven incentives.

"Ultimately, each home and business should be capable of generating, storing and sharing energy," Cohen says. "Solar, wind, geothermal, and perhaps some other technology yet to be invented must be subsidized to make them cheaper than fossil fuels."

He says at some point, the subsidies will no longer be needed.

But change is coming or at least it should. The air just can't take what we're pumping into by way of coal fires, automobile exhaust and general toxic-laden combustion. And that brings me to my next point.

Job rating: Strong.

Reason No. 5: The real cost of fossil fuels. According to the most recent World Energy Outlook report by the International Energy Agency, investing in clean energy now is far more effective than attempting to clean up the mess later.

Eric Wesoff of greentechmedia.com pored over the report and came up with this quote from Fatih Birol, IEA chief economist: "As each year passes without clear signals to drive investment in clean energy, the 'lock-in' of high-carbon infrastructure is making it harder and more expensive to meet our energy security and climate goals."

Wesoff writes: "For every $1 of investment in cleaner technology that is avoided in the power sector before 2020, an additional $4.30 would need to be spent after 2020 to compensate for the increased emissions."

Succinct point. It makes me wonder how politicians who say they would obliterate any regulations in favor of jobs will be viewed in 10 years. The regulation busters line up on one side of the aisle, but both parties are guilty of promoting ill-fated policies that add to the nation's graying skies.

The jobs that apparently need fewer regulations from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or other agencies are noble but usually controversial. They include mining coal from mountaintops, drilling offshore for oil, tapping the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, building a cross-country straw to suck out Canada's oil sand and allowing the hydraulic fracturing.

Job creation can be done other ways. I recall sitting on spit on Nantucket one summer with my brother-in-law. We were inspired by the long delayed Cape Wind offshore turbines. He speculated that President Bush would have produced a far longer lasting legacy had he established just a smidgen of support for alternative energies rather than invading Iraq or even if he did.

Bush had the right idea -- domestic energy security. Just a different way of getting there.

Job rating: Depends on political winds.
Reason No. 6: Energy and fuel efficiency. Energy author Daniel Yergin writes in a piece on Huffington Post about how Boeing's Dreamliner won the hearts of airline executives not with its speed but with its 20 percent better fuel efficiency. "The airlines were voting their pocketbooks," he says.

Nearly every week, another big publicly traded Wall Street powerhouse embraces the cost savings of installing energy efficient lighting and electrical upgrades. And many are taking the concept further, entering the tricky yet individually lucrative realm of sustainability. Big companies that see the light have discovered not only savings in multiple aspects of their operations but have learned to reap the value of the public goodwill that comes with it.

Home builders are another group that has found value in efficiencies. Commercial builders also have come aboard, slowly incorporating building information modeling into design to reduce energy and operations costs with a slew of new technologies and products.

The EPA reports that more than 400 home builders have "committed to meeting the updated and more rigorous requirements for new homes that earn the Energy Star label in 2012." Those builders discovered value by inching closer to homes that use less energy. Net-zero homes may not be far off.

The EPA says that since 1995, about 1.2 million new homes have earned its Energy Star rating, which translates to savings of about $350 million on utility bills. The list of builders includes six of the country’s largest: Ashton Woods Homes, Beazer Homes, KB Home, Meritage Homes, M/I Homes and NVR Inc.

Job rating: Good but depends on consumer acceptance.

Reason No. 7: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This particular topic is close to home for me. I am employed because of stimulus money. My mission these past two years has been to maximize kilowatt hour savings at 36 cities and three counties in California's San Joaquin Valley. On that front, I'm getting closer.

My team and I will get it done. We will help our jurisdictions save money and start them on a diet of energy efficiency and clean energy. My boss says it's pre-ordained.

Others have done it. The 112-page report, "Profiles of Local Clean Energy Leadership: How America's Cities and Counties are Using Federal Energy Block Grants to Create Jobs, Save Energy and Prevent Pollution," is full of stories about how other cities spent their American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant allocations.

To me, it made a lot of sense. I've been immersed in this world for many moons, speaking a language of kWh, T8s, VFDs, SEER, LEED and even less interesting terms.

What's great about the report is that it shows cities beaten roughly about the head and shoulders by the economy can navigate the many bureaucratic requirements and restrictions and actually implement money meant to do them good. I hope to pass these success stories onto my cities and counties.

Job rating: Steady.

Yep. We can save energy. We can figure out how to be better stewards of our communities and nation. Every one of the issues I listed translates to development and growth. Some could be really significant. Maybe we could clean that air a bit and get some jobs at the same time.

Microgrids, solar and achieving energy independence

Comedian George Wallace often starts a joke with the line, "I be thinking."

I use the reference for two reasons. First, I saw Wallace in Vegas recently (and I totally recommend his show) and second, because I'd been thinking about teaming solar with fuel cells to create power producers on a small scale via energy-independent homes, commercial buildings and industrial scale operations.

The conclusion? The merger is possible. But more importantly, the query introduced me to the concept of microgrids and the Galvin Electricity Initiative.

I'd posed the question of fuel cell-solar viability to Al Weinrub, who penned the report, "Community Power: Decentralized Renewable Energy in California." Weinrub, coordinator of the San Francisco Bay Area Local Clean Energy Alliance, said quite a few people have been thinking in the direction of microgrids, which he defined as "islands of self-sufficient energy producers that are independent of the grid or possibly networked into the grid."

Galvin Electricity Initiative

And he said the group includes folks who want to create net-zero communities not dependent on the grid. He introduced me to the Galvin Electricity Initiative, founded by former Motorola Chairman and CEO Robert Galvin. The initiative addresses a revamped utility system incorporating microelectrity production. Galvin's proposal is meant to be a catalyst for transforming America’s electric grid to "ways that are profoundly beneficial to consumers, the environment and the economy."

"In these models, fuel cells can play a role, but there is little reason to go to fossil-based fuel cells," Weinrub said. "That would only prolong the use of fossil fuels."

He compared it to combined heat and power technology, "where ultimately it makes sense only if the source of heat is renewable fuel."

I believe Weinrub's response is perfect and gives me perspective on fuel cells, which can be fueled with natural gas.

Oil still in system

I'm a little awash in oil with my Alaska background so petroleum taints my world view.

It was big news up north when the cat train went up to Prudhoe Bay for the first time in the winter of 1968, followed by a collective "Holy (moly), there's work and they're paying $24 an hour" from the hundreds of un- or underemployed in the Alaska Interior. I was 10 in '71 but eventually worked in the oil patch one summer in Bismark, N.D. building concrete weights for a 48-inch diameter pipeline.

So I'm somewhat impressed by North Dakota's current performance in petroleum exports. Steve Everly of the Kansas City Star writes, "Perhaps within a year the state is expected to supply more oil for domestic use than the 1.1 million barrels a day that Saudi Arabia now exports to the United States."

Likewise, I'm intrigued by the Canada tar sands pipeline.

Bill McKibben would yell at me. I know, I know. But my perspective is a little old-fashioned. We used wood heat for six years back in very rural Fairbanks in the early 1970s during mom's Last Whole Earth Catalog phase. Eighteen cords a season is a lot to cut and split, believe me. I was disgusted by coal on a personal level as sub-bituminous sends dust everywhere and creates a haze in your house. But rich people had propane tanks. And I still marvel at running water. Melting snow is a pain and rainwater gets mosquito infested quick -- although the Aussies have perfected those systems.

Moving beyond fossil fuel

I ramble, but I guess I'm using this navel gazing to understand the feelings of my generation. It's tough to move on from burning whatever we could get our hands on.

At some point, solar panels on newly constructed homes will be commonplace. But I agree with multiple studies that call for added government support for renewables as right now, a 19.5-year return on investment is hard to justify by homeowners like myself. Although my co-worker just plunked down about $30,000 for a solar system on his home.

Growth is unsustainable

I was fascinated by Asher Miller's video "Who killed economic growth?" In it Miller, executive director of the Post Carbon Institute, says we've been seduced by cheap energy and the concept that constant growth fueled by industrialization is the way it should be. His contention is there are limits we've been ignoring and that change is coming to a screen near you quite soon.

People like Weinrub, Miller and McKibben are the visionaries who will prod at least a percentage of us in the right direction, and hopefully we'll be able to guide movement toward something that enables us to see the Sierra on a non-rainy day. Running in Valley air is really pretty nasty.

Right now I'm doing my best to help. I'm working on guiding the 39 cities and counties to install energy saving projects. I administer stimulus energy efficiency grants, and it's been a long haul from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in February 2009. The retrofit projects are lighting, pumps, ACs and other stuff, but all are big on energy savings. I'll be done on most of them by March.

Going net-zero

Many of these cities want to install solar, so in my free time I'm trying to find out ways to do that cheaply. Their big expenses (most of these communities are rather small) are pumping for water and waste water. For instance, Pump No. 8 in one Merced County town runs 24 hours a day during the hot season and costs upwards of $58,000 per month.

Such spiraling costs create incentive as does California's requirement that energy suppliers provide a third of their electricity through renewables by 2020.

Maybe a San Joaquin Valley city will go net-zero. Progressive Firebaugh, perhaps? Santa Monica is pushing in that direction. Cities in Norway and Germany reportedly have reached the threshold.

We'll see how it works out.

3 developments accelerate clean energy evolution

When I was 17, I discovered how fast my step-father's then almost-new 1976 SR5 Celica fastback would go.

105 mph.

Urging me on was a not-so-shabby Chevelle. It passed me heading out the deserted Glenn Highway near Mirror Lake going about 90. I blew past it at what I discovered to be top speed, catching a little air on the rolling frost heaves outside Anchorage.

I'm getting that same sense of wide-open acceleration now, watching developments in clean energy. Technologies appear to be testing just how fast they can move forward.

Solar and LED lighting threaten to go mainstream with price reductions. But other technologies also show exceptional promise.

1. Passive House. A house at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History designed with no furnace -- honest -- has been completed and is already catching attention. The residence, which uses "passive house" design and technology, cuts its greenhouse gas footprint and utility costs to the quick. SmartHome Cleveland received a national write-up from Renee Schoof of McClatchy Newspapers.

"Because the house is so well insulated, it can hold heat from sunshine, body heat, lights and appliances," she wrote.

I did a piece on the house while it was under construction in January 2011, explaining how the passive house movement is gaining a foothold in Europe and possibly finding its way into this country. Super-insulated homes are hardly new, especially in the North. I worked on one at 14 in 1975 in Fairbanks. But their adoption has been slow going.

That may certainly change when people paying hundreds of dollars a month in heating bills see an option for cutting that to near nothing.

The stakes are high. Buildings account for about half of global energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. And while there's a big push nationally and worldwide to address that with retrofits, upgrades and better building practices, finding the mainstream remains a challenge.

But I'm feeling positive, especially with efforts like the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED building certification system, which was designed to improve energy savings, water efficiency and CO2 emissions reduction. And more stringent building practices, now in play, would make a big dent in greenhouse gas emissions and energy use.

2. Buildings that clean the air. This boggles the mind. Alcoa Inc. has developed a proprietary process, using a titanium dioxide coating, called EcoClean, that offers, in the company's words, "the world’s first coil-coated aluminum architectural panel that helps clean itself and the air around it."

Here's the way it works, according to Alcoa's website: titanium dioxide on Alcoa's EcoClean siding interacts with sunlight to break down organic matter both on and floating around the surface of the building panels, leaving the organic matter sitting on the surface. Rain washes it away. The Pittsburg, Pa.-based company says 10,000 square feet has the cleaning power of 80 trees.

Expect other companies to jump on the bandwagon. This is a simple way for corporate America to "green" their portfolios with minimal cost, and it could be a big deal.

3. Buildings that generate more power than they use. The IEEE released a report that says solar eventually could begin to challenge fossil fuels in electricity production. "Solar PV will be a game changer," said James Prendergast, IEEE executive director, in a statement. "No other alternative source has the same potential." The professional organization that promotes technological advancement says solar has been growing 40 percent a year over the past decade.

That means homeowners who install solar today may wind up selling their surplus capacity back to their utilities. This would create an entirely new dynamic and further advance the looks-like-it's-gonna-happen theory of Al Weinrub who wrote a fascinating report about how decentralized power generation through root-top and parking lot solar could be a game changer in California.

In Texas, Weinrub's vision is playing out. Dan and Karen Cripe of Round Rock, Texas are producing more energy than they consume in their energy efficient home, according to a story by ABC affiliate WOTV. "
Our electric bills have actually dipped into the negative range," says Dan Cripe. (A friend of mine sent the link.)

Expect to see more reports in this vein. That's why I used the Celica acceleration analogy. For one, that was a great car. Quite dependable. And it didn't go too fast, just fast enough to pass the Detroit standard-bearer muscle car.

Actually, there's more to the speeding story. The Chevelle took up my challenge and blew past me going about 120 mph. The driver and passenger were grinning, loving the race. Must have been headed to Palmer. Barely anybody lived in Wasilla back then.

Photo: SmartHome Cleveland courtesy Cleveland Museum of Natural History.

Study Touts Rooftop Solar Program



Rooftops are becoming valuable real estate.

In the Inland Valley of Southern California, massive warehouses are doubling as energy generators. Now, business and real estate leaders just to the west in Los Angeles say the seemingly wasted space atop apartment complexes could help meet renewable-energy goals, cut the city's carbon footprint, create jobs and save tenants and landlords money.

In a fascinating report, a group of leaders from the city of Los Angeles, banking industry, affordable housing and business suggests a comprehensive program and feed-in tariff to put solar panels on flat rooftops could create enough power to supply 8% of the city's needs, while slashing utility bills and generating up to 4,500 direct and indirect jobs.

Here is a related story in smartplanet.

"There is a tremendous capacity for multifamily housing to contribute to a broader energy program," the report states. It calls multifamily housing, "The second-most cost-effective market in the city after commercial and industrial for solar."

The program would allow businesses, property owners and non-profits to sell the power back to the local utility. Participants would receive a payment from the utility for each kilowatt hour of power fed back to the grid. The report estimates 4,000 apartment buildings with roofs large enough and flat enough to accommodate such a project.

The Los Angeles report reinforces the work of Al Weinrub, who penned an earlier study of rooftop solar and decentralized power. In it, he says businesses with large rooftops or parking lots can become small power companies that feed electricity into the grid.

One of the cool aspects of this is that the structures are already connected to the power grid and have an existing footprint, so no large-scale arrays need to occupy expanses of land and the environmental review process is minimized.

Of course, none of this comes easy, and there are barriers.

Chief among them is that local solar incentives are declining and Los Angeles does not yet have a feed-in tariff program in place. The benefit to tenants also is uncertain, although property owners who wish to join could be required to participate in energy-efficiency programs that lead to rebates or reduced utility costs for tenants.

Still, the two studies offer a tantalizing look at what could be the future of California if Gov. Brown can accomplish his green-jobs program, which calls for, among other things, more rooftop solar.

Photo of Southern California Edison's rooftop solar program by ecmweb.com

Energy efficiency scores big, and there's growth on horizon

An increasing number of public and private organizations are realizing the importance of energy savings and picking up on the philosophy pioneered in 1970s California by the Godfather of Green, Art Rosenfeld.

While Rosenfeld, a nuclear physicist and California energy commissioner, started the movement that saved the state having to build many new electricity generating facilities, he's no longer the Lone Ranger.

For instance, the Manteca Unified School District reportedly shaved $2.2 million from its energy bill over 19 months through energy efficiency.

DTE Energy, which operates Detroit Edison, reported that its energy efficiency programs saved customers $31 million in 2010 with lifetime savings estimated to be about $520 million.

And 16 members of the American Chemistry Council saved enough BTUs through energy efficiency measures in 2010 to power all the homes in a city the size of Akron, Ohio, for one year.

To quote Donald Trump: "That's huge."

Energy efficiency operates through a simple premise: install devices that use less power to save energy and, more importantly, money. Another benefit is a reduced greenhouse gas footprint. But that benefit is more esoteric and generally lost on Joe Consumer, especially with fuel prices taking an extra share of his resources.

Many of the cities and counties we're working with at the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization are doing the same thing. Although the only recognition they're likely to get is whatever I write in this post and others that follow.

One of them, the City of Delano recently purchased 250 ecostrips for employee work stations. These power strips enable workers to turn off various electronic devices when not in use to reduce what many in the business call "vampire" power. This siphons off electricity for unneeded functions.

According to my calculations, which show the average ecostrip can save about 12 percent of energy used, the savings for Delano can save about 36,180 kWh a year. Not bad for something that costs $24.95. The project is just the start, and the city has much more planned.

And Tulare County, which is gearing up to launch an $826,000 energy efficiency lighting upgrade of about 17 of its buildings, could rack up savings of about 900,000 kWh. And that's just by replacing light fixtures and bulbs.

In fact, SJVCEO's work with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, which includes Tulare County and 35 other jurisdictions, amounts to potential savings of 5.5 million kWh. The savings on electricity bills and in CO2 should be noticeable.

When I started working for this organization about a year and a half ago, energy efficiency hardly seemed tangible. Sure, I knew about using less power. In fact, I had nothing but a swamp cooler in my home despite summer temperatures in the Valley pushing past 100 degrees 40 to 50 days a year. Evaporative coolers use a fraction of the power an AC unit does.

And I knew about turning off lights. My father, the light cop, also wouldn't turn on the furnace until the mud puddles outside started to freeze at night.

But my experience working with utility and state engineers on energy audits and my own research has shown what an important role energy efficiency can play on a national scale. Buildings use an estimated 80 percent of the nation's generated power.

Cut that by a third, and dividends come not only in reduced emissions but in national security. Less reliance on imported energy means less exposure to fluctuations in oil prices.

Extending that argument into renewable energy further bolsters the national security benefit while reducing pollution.

Some of the biggest drivers in this sector are institutions of higher learning.

For instance, universities in the Big 10 purchased 256.6 million kWh of green power in the 2010-2011 academic year, earning a first-place conference ranking in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's College and University Green Power Challenge. The University of Pennsylvania in the Ivy League won for best individual college with 200.2 million kWh purchased.

Gazing into my imaginary crystal ball, I see energy efficiency gaining increased importance on all fronts. Yet, I also see people responding more favorably to renewable energy, especially as prices for alternatives drop. If solar does become economically favorable even without subsidies, the decentralized power generation system envisioned by Al Weinrub will become a game changer.

And I see the EPA's annual greenhouse gas inventory gaining importance. The recently released 16th annual report shows a 6.1 percent decline in overall emissions for 2009, largely due to a stalled economy.

Perhaps in a few years, that decline will be attributed to efficiencies and alternatives.

Photo: Pre energy efficiency at old Lathrop School. Courtesy Manteca Unified School District.