The aggressive development and implementation of a full portfolio of advanced electricity technologies could reduce the economic cost of cutting future U.S. CO2 emissions by more than 50 percent while meeting the continuing growth in demand for electricity according to research from the Electric Power Research Institute.
EPRI says that previous research has shown that absent investments in advanced technologies, significant reductions in future emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases will result in higher prices for electricity and natural gas, and reduced economic growth.
However, by developing and deploying advanced electricity technologies, such as a “smart” electricity grid, plug-in hybrid vehicles, new advanced nuclear reactors, and clean coal technologies with carbon capture and storage, this EPRI study,The Power to Reduce CO2 Emissions -? The Full Portfolio (PDF), says that the same cuts in future U.S. CO2 emissions could be accomplished at much lower cost -? saving as much as $1 trillion in future U.S. economic growth under some scenarios analyzed.
EBAY'S WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM PAYS FOR ITSELF
eBay saves water and energy with a program that'll achieve ROI within 18 months. How much could you save? Go to calculator>>
CLEAN ENERGY DOESN'T GET ANY COOLER THAN THIS
Hybrid Cooling Solutions from Ice Energy. There's no cooler way to improve your bottom line. Discover the power of Ice. >>
CUT ENERGY COSTS WITH VMWARE VIRTUALIZATION
Eliminate server sprawl, reduce costs and save energy with VMware Virtualization >>
FINALLY! NEXT-GENERATION CARBON MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE FOR BUSINESSES
Clear Standards environmental intelligence software helps businesses measure, analyze, and reduce their carbon footprint. No more spreadsheets! >>
It's a perfect storm for green communications. There are two industries traditionally considered first for the chop during an economic downturn: environment ... continue »
The "Energy Star" label is extremely or very important to 68 percent of consumers, according to the fourth EcoPinion Survey from ...
click to view full size chart »
A Telegraph Business Club Video MasterClass by Guy Beaudin the Head of Solutions for PC World Business on SMEs and the environment....
Comments
NO! No to nuclear, coal carbon capture and storage. The inclusion of these options casts doubts on much else that you advise.
LEE LOE August 23rd, 2007I am sorry, but inclusion of nuclear and coal in the mix casts serious doubt on your recommendations. I personally believe that conservation and radical re-engineering of many products can cut our energy uses 780 to 80 percent, but that big, centralized energy systems are first of all, inefficient by their nature, and second, in the cases of nuclear and coal, inherently dangerous. Solar, wind, geothermal, etc. are much more viable alternatives, and when combined with massive conservation and re-engineering, contain the key to long-term energy security.
I recommend reading Amory Lovins. Here’s an introductory article to his work that I wrote a few years ago: http://www.frugalmarketing.com/dtb/amorylovins.shtml
Shel Horowitz, author, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First
Shel Horowitz, Ethical Marketing Expert August 24th, 2007