Location Efficiency Study

This research analyzed a sample of 40,000 mortgages and found the higher the rate of vehicle ownership, the greater the probability of mortgage default. The authors conclude, "location efficiency matters."Abstract:

Using a sample of over 40,000 mort

Tags: foreclosures walking new urbanism

Location Efficiency Study

Backlink: http://www.blogcatalog.com/search/frame?term=location&id;=0897862e2dce7c09620411ab2605b179

Britain's New Green Deal: Transforming Energy Efficiency

Britain's new government is proposing radically new energy policies, with a "Green Deal" that would retrofit the country's woefully energy-inefficient housing stock. In an interview with Yale Environment 360, UK Energy and Climate Minister Greg Barker talks about why an overhaul of the approach to energy is essential for the nation's future.

Britain's new ruling coalition knows it faces a formidable task if it is to fulfill its pledge of being "the greenest government ever." But Greg Barker, the UK's new Energy and Climate Change Minister, says that even in the face of budget cuts and fiscal austerity, he is optimistic about what the coalition can do to put Britain on course to meet its goal of cutting carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050. Barker, 44, a former PR executive and Conservative member of Parliament, is promoting the government's plan for a so-called new Green Deal, a program aimed at retrofitting Britain's notoriously energy-wasteful homes with efficiency improvements, with no upfront cost to homeowners. "We have one of the lowest energy-efficiency ratings in Europe," he says, "and that's something that's simply not acceptable." In an interview with Yale Environment 360, Barker discussed how the Green Deal would work, the role of offshore wind and other renewables in Britain's future, the need for new nuclear plants in the UK, and the government's plan for a green investment bank that would help finance new low-carbon technology. "We think that there is a clear commercial advantage for the UK in being an early mover in the drive to a clean economy," he said. Yale Environment 360: Your government is now promoting a new Green Deal. Can you explain how that would work, and specifically when it comes to homeowners, how it will enable them to make major energy-efficiency improvements without sustaining unaffordable costs? Greg Barker: Well, I think it's important first to put it in context. The new coalition government elected in May of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats really comes together at its strongest on the green agenda. And the new prime minister, David Cameron, within days of taking office, committed to being the greenest government ever. What does that mean? Well, really that means going beyond the rhetoric of the Blair years and actually coming up with some really clear policies for delivering transformation to a low-carbon economy during the next decade. One of our flagship policies is the Green Deal. And that recognizes that the UK has been lacking far too long in energy efficiency, both in the business sector and also critically in the domestic sector. We have one of the lowest energy-efficiency ratings of any country in Europe, and that's something that's simply not acceptable. So there's a lot to do. And therefore, what we need is a real game-changer, a complete step-change in the scale of investment in energy efficiency. Historically, most programs for energy efficiency have been driven by annually capped grants from central government to particular programs. And while in themselves they've been worthwhile, relative to the scale of the challenge and the 26 million homes that we have to transform, we've been making very slow progress. e360: So what is the coalition government proposing? Barker: What we're going to do is go away from the stop-go, government-funded programs, and through using smart regulation, open up this market to the private sector. We believe we can create a market that will bring in billions of pounds of investment into energy efficiency for homes and businesses. We're going to create a mechanism whereby the cost of making these [energy-efficiency] measures can all be financed through pay-as-you-save models, with the finance being repaid over a period of 20 years through the bill on each individual property. Now, that's a big change. To date it had to be paid upfront, either by the individual homeowner or through a grant. By pinning the repayments to the bill of the property, it means it's not a debt. It's not even a mortgage. It doesn't need to be credit-scored, because if the individual living in that particular home moves, dies, ownership changes, or they cease to rent, it stays on the bill of that property, just like the conventional energy bill. But there's one golden rule: The cost of financing the measures, which would be anything up to 6,000 pounds, must always be less than the savings anticipated from the installations [of energy-efficiency measures]. e360: Who will pay the upfront costs? Barker: The upfront cost will be paid for by private sector finance. Now, in some cases, those companies with a big balance sheet may wish to finance it themselves on their own balance sheet. Others, and I think it will probably be the majority, will team up with banks and commercial finance houses as a partnership. So far as the consumer is concerned, there's no upfront cost at all. As far as the homeowner is concerned, all they have to do is have an energy audit for their home. That independent audit will say this home qualifies for the following measures, and providing that they meet the payback rule, then those measures will be installed and be financed through the property's energy bill over 20 years. Again, the golden rule: Savings will be always bigger than the financing costs, which means that not only will people end up with new improvements to their property or the property that they rent, but actually they'll see lower bills immediately as well. e360: You mentioned that your new government is making a total change and a new approach to energy issues. Just recently, the largest wind farm in the world opened just off the coast of Britain, and yet the vast majority of the contracts for that project actually went to non-UK companies. Barker: Absolutely. And only 20 percent of the supply chain on this largest wind farm in the world has been met from the UK. We've got to change all that. That's Labor's legacy to the coalition. We've got to make the UK not just a great place to deploy these new technologies, particularly offshore wind, but we've actually got to make it a great place to manufacture the capability that we're going to deploy. So we, the new government, have an ambitious vision to create the necessary supply chain. And that means attracting in new participants, attracting new investment into the UK, making sure we have an optimum business condition. That's why despite the fiscal situation we're bringing down the corporation tax, why we're streamlining planning measures, and why we're looking to reform the system for support of offshore wind to make sure that it's extremely competitive internationally. e360: You've also talked about creating a green investment bank. How would that work, and would that be part of the funding projects in industries like this? Barker: Yes. The green investment bank is critical to our vision for a low-carbon economy. We see it not as supporting or subsidizing non-commercial projects, but as being key to catalyzing and leveraging greater amounts of private-sector finance, often helping just alter the risk profile or give greater certainty to projects where there's a strong public-sector interest. There are three things to business, which we think are absolutely essential ingredients for long-term success of the transition to a low-carbon economy. We think business needs these three things in government policy: transparency, longevity, and certainty - TLC, if you like. And too often in the past, the short-term measures have been tinkering with policy, which has sent confused and mixed messages to the investment community. What we need to see is actually fewer interventions in the market. But when we do intervene, we need to do so in a very robust fashion that is transparent, clear, and gives real long-term certainty to business. e360: Would this green investment bank be set up with a combination of private and public funds? Barker: We're currently looking at the various models. Three government departments - my own Department of Energy and Climate Change, the Department of Business Innovation and Skills, and, of course, the Treasury - are currently looking at various models, and we'll be making further announcements soon. We are determined to come out on the ambitious end of the spectrum, but I also think that the institution that emerges won't be fully cooked on day one. We want to create something that is sustainable, that commands the confidence of the markets, but is also capable of growing and expanding its role as it develops a track record of success. e360: How will austerity and the budget cuts that the government is making - how is that affecting the ambition of what you're trying to do and the scope of it? Barker: Well, of course, it's tough. We the new government inherited a very difficult situation. The last Labor government doubled the national debt and left us the highest deficit in the G20. But we are taking prompt action to turn that around and to transform public finances. Unless the market's going to have confidence in the public finances, unless the economy is on a sound fiscal footing, then no sector can grow over the long term. So we see returning the public finances to a sound state of affairs an absolute priority across the board. Obviously that does mean that some tough choices have to be made, but the low-carbon transition and investment is absolutely vital to our recovery, and we are determined that we will endeavor to protect the core public investment in that. e360: I'm interested in what you see as the role of nuclear in Britain's energy future. I know a number of plants are set to expire in the next decade. Do you favor more nuclear plants being built in Britain, and if so, how will they be funded? Barker: Well, a diverse energy mix is absolutely vital to the UK's future. That means a strong role for renewable. But it also means other sources of clean energy like nuclear must be part of the mix. Now, we do see new nuclear as being part of that mix, an important part of that mix. But that doesn't mean to say that there's going to be public subsidy for nuclear, and that's the important differentiating point... We are confident that the private sector can come forth with viable projects for a new fleet of nuclear reactors that are safe and commercially viable. e360: Do you see the switch to renewables as important for Britain's overall economic recovery and future growth? Barker: Absolutely. We think that there is a clear commercial advantage for the UK in being an early mover in the drive to a clean economy. We think that gaining competitive advantage in these growing industries such as offshore wind and other renewables will actually provide thousands of jobs in the future, will create an added value economy. And we are committed to making sure that the UK isn't just a great place to deploy renewables, but that we actually we capture a lot of that R & D that's going on in our universities and in the research houses of our leading companies. Photo by Terry Grealey/flickr/Creative Commons Reprinted with permission from Yale Environment 360

Post originale: http://featured.matternetwork.com/2010/11/britains-new-green-deal-transforming.cfm

Energy Efficiency: Real Estate's Next Granite Counter Top?

by Elisa Wood

A lot of good economic reasons exist to pursue energy efficiency. Still the average person tends not to. This is no surprise. If I cannot see, touch, buy, sell, trade or save efficiency, if it's invisible, how can I pay it any real attention? Often on the vanguard, Boston-based Conservation Services Group is working on an idea to make home efficiency more tangible. It is a surprisingly simple idea. One that is likely to leave a lot of people saying, 'Of course. Why didn't I think of that?' You might say CSG is making energy efficiency the next granite kitchen counter top of the real estate business. Through a $348,000 grant from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, CSG is working on a metric to describe a home's energy efficiency value. When a homeowner lists a house for sale, the metric would be included in the multiple listing service (MLS), right along with the home's price, number of bedrooms, square-footage and location. Suddenly, efficiency is tangible, something that can be quantified and can add or detract to home value. It's not yet clear what that metric will look like. It might be a numerical score or a certification like the Energy Star label. Figuring that out is part of CSG's task, as it puts in place a program for New York over the next two years. "You can imagine the pitfalls in establishing what this score would be," said David Weitz, director of CSG's Applied Building Science Division. "How do you present it in a way that is accessible to the greatest number of people. Unfortunately, there is no right answer." CSG plans to hold focus groups with homeowners to get a sense of what might work. The idea is to come up with a measurement that translates into a selling point, much like the granite counter top or hard wood floors. The hope is that sellers will install efficiency to increase their grade. Presumably, the higher grade will make the home more marketable. Weitz also must convince MLS administrators to accept the metric and include it in the listings. Fortunately, CSG is not alone in this pursuit. Similar programs are in the works in other parts of the country. In addition, the US Department of Energy is working on creating a national an 'e-scale' label for homes. Weitz hopes the DOE effort and various local labeling initiatives will come together to create consistency in labeling nationwide. In winning the award, the 26-year-old CSG edged out more than 350 proposals, submitted last April, from organizations in 44 states that offered scalable approaches for spurring energy efficiency retrofits in existing buildings. Grants totaling $2.7 million went to nine winners, which were evaluated by a panel of experts in real estate, finance, construction, government policy and energy efficiency technologies. "In the past, people would buy a house without any real understanding of its ongoing energy costs. Establishing an energy efficiency category, within MLS listings, will help during the selection process by providing homebuyers with another essential piece of information," Weitz said. If it's successful, who knows, maybe someday the real estate mantra will no longer be 'location, location, location,' but instead, 'efficiency, efficiency, efficiency.' Reprinted with permission from Cleantechies

Post originale: http://featured.matternetwork.com/2010/11/energy-efficiency-real-estates-next.cfm

How Lobbyists Undermine the Efficiency of Your Tires

In passing the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act, the federal government acted to drastically improve the average fuel economy of new vehicles sold in the United States. But increased CAFE standards weren't the only aspect in the legislation intended to get Americans driving more efficiently.

One little-known provision of the bill was targeted at raising consumer awareness of low rolling resistance tires, which can give drivers as much as a 10 percent improvement in fuel efficiency over competing models. The National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration was directed to devise a mandatory labeling system for all new replacement tires sold in the U.S., giving consumers a chance to do side-by-side comparisons of government-backed fuel efficiency, safety, and durability ratings. That labeling and ratings system was scheduled to be implemented within 24 months, but has been delayed thanks in part to pressure from the tire industry, which prefers a "point-of-sale customer educational program revolving around government-mandated rolling resistance ratings." The industry's proposal would: - Force tire sellers to display a simplified sticker design at the point of sale rather than mandating a tag be placed on each tire.

- Replace the color-coded , 1-100 number rating with a five-star system, representing performance relative to competing models designed for each class of vehicle, rather than a baseline score.

- Obfuscate the meanings of the numbers by renaming the safety rating the "wet traction rating," and the durability rating the "tread wear rating."

Follow the Money The Tire Industry Association (TIA) hired two seasoned Washington power players to influence the regulatory process: former House speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois, and former Democratic representative Al Wynn of Maryland. In an April interview with MotorAge, TIA vice president Roy Littlefield said the group was "totally committed to [the] effort," refusing to comment on its total spending but adding, "former Congressmen don't come cheap." Behind the tire industry's dubious assertion that attaching the labels would, as Littlefield told MotorAge, place a "tremendous burden on manufacturers," is the reality that such a system might very well force tire companies to drastically overhaul their product lineups and improve the base quality of the tires they sell. The industry isn't lying when it says the proposed labels would be a burden-but not due to the cost of the plastic tags manufacturers would be forced to fix to each tire. The broader effect of such a system would be that consumers would likely demand better quality tires at lower price points, creating unwanted strife for an industry that is only now beginning to recover from recent losses brought on by rising costs for raw materials. Few customers are willing to sacrifice safety, durability, or fuel efficiency when they buy new tires, so if information is presented to them in such a way that makes the trade-offs associated with each model clear, the result would likely create a further crush on high-quality rubbers-something that hasn't escaped the notice of rubber industry either. Yesterday, one of the leading suppliers of rubber to the tire industry, the LANXESS Corporation, issued a press release urging NHTSA to move forward with the labeling system as soon as possible. LANXESS has also spent at least $30,000 lobbying the House of Representatives and Senate on the issue over the past few months. That spending was likely aimed at countering the efforts of the TIA and its member companies, who began to pour money into their congressional lobbying efforts early this year, citing a desire to "monitor" the regulatory process as it unfolds. The TIA alone has spent $50,000 lobbying the issue, and though issue-specific spending information isn't available for the sector's member companies, Goodyear and Bridgestone's political action committees each spend hundreds of thousands of dollars per year on campaign contributions-with the majority of the money going to Democrats. Where the Rubber Meets the Road Whether that money has influenced the delay of a new labeling standard is debatable, but in blocking the measure this year until further consumer testing could be performed, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Administrator Cass Sunstein wrote that NHTSA should "aim to measure consumers' understanding of the label, and their likely behavior given that understanding" before finalizing its plan, setting the process back at least another six months. The reasoning provided by Sunstein somewhat resembles the rationale offered by TIA for its alternative customer education-based proposal, though it remains unclear whether OIRA has come to see things the industry's way or is simply making a good-faith effort to ensure the effectiveness of the labels. (Records do indicate that in January, representatives from several tire companies met with White House OIRA officials to advocate for their proposal.) Meanwhile, the NHTSA was scheduled to complete its retooled study of the labels' effectiveness on September 30 of this year, though the results haven't yet been made public. The NHSTA will review the new information and use it to reformulate the labeling system-if it so chooses. If the agency fails to devise a new rule that is satisfactory to OIRA, that office might again choose to send the rule back for further study. The Path of Least Resistance Even if the tire industry is unsuccessful in steering the implementation of NHTSA's consumer information efforts, the delays have given it more time to prepare for changes that in the words of one industry-funded study, would "result in [possible] shifts in consumer demand for replacement tires." For consumers, the takeaway from all of this legislative sausage-making should be the importance of gathering and comparing safety, durability and efficiency information before making any tire purchase-whether or not the government makes that process as easy showing up at the store and looking at a standardized label. (Consumer Reports is a good place to start for safety, durability and rolling resistance information, but several other groups including Green Seal also rate tires for efficiency.) Drivers can save big money on gas and lower the emissions from their cars and trucks simply by buying the right tires and keeping them properly rotated and inflated. Those measures are lot less expensive than buying a new hybrid or electric car, and in some cases can provide equally impressive fuel economy improvements. Reprinted with permission from HybridCars

Post originale: http://featured.matternetwork.com/2010/11/how-lobbyists-undermine-efficiency-your.cfm

Administration Unveils First-Ever Efficiency Rules for Large Trucks

The White House has announced regulations that will for the first time create fuel economy standards for medium and heavy-duty vehicles ranging from tow trucks to big rigs. The standards are scheduled to take effect in 2014, and will require a 20 percent improvement in emissions and fuel consumption for large, long-haul tractor-trailers by 2018. Heavy-duty pickups and vans will be forced to increase efficiency by 10 or 15 percent depending on fuel type, with work vehicles like cement mixers having to improve by 10 percent over the same period.

The American Truck Association has pledged support for the approach, which it finds preferable to commercial and industrial emissions caps. "Any federally mandated carbon control program applied to transportation fuels likely will increase the cost of fossil fuels," said the trade group in a statement last week. "Discussions of carbon control programs should be premised on fundamental principles designed to minimize disruptions to the transportation of goods and to protect the viability of the trucking industry." The proposed policy will seek to reduce emissions associated with commercial trucks in a way that will minimize cost increases associated with the new vehicles and actually provide a payback for operators in the way of fuel savings early on. The EPA says long-haul tractor owners could see a return of as much as $74,000 over the life of their vehicles thanks to the law. "Over all, this program will save $41 billion, and much of it will stay home in the U.S. economy rather than paying for imported oil," said EPA administrator Lisa Jackson in briefing this morning. Still, the new regulations don't go as far as many environmental groups would have liked. A recent study from the National Academy of Sciences found that by deploying vehicles updated with existing technologies, the commercial trucking industry would be able to reduce emissions by at least one-third, with fuel savings paybacks coming after just two years of typical operation. "President Obama did the right thing by encouraging the creation of these standards, but today's proposal should be strengthened further to maximize the environmental, security and economic benefits," said Luke Tonachel of Natural Resources Defense Council in a statement. "The National Academies have shown that cost-effective, clean-vehicle technologies exist that can go beyond the EPA and DOT proposal and more than double the pollution and fuel savings." Many companies within the truck manufacturing industry have been preparing to improve the efficiency of their vehicles for years, anticipating a need for better fuel economy generated by rising fuel costs or new government regulations. Navistar has been selling diesel-electric hybrids since 2007, and will soon begin production on its eStar, an all-electric plug-in truck. Another of the country's largest trucking OEMs, Freightliner, has also announced plans for an electric model, and dedicated fuel-saving manufacturers like Smith and Eaton have recently entered the market as well. But this first round of federal requirements is unlikely to affect sales of advanced-technology hybrid and electric trucks. Those vehicles may soon be subject to targeted purchaser incentives if groups like the Electrification Coalition have their way, but the goal for EPA and NHTSA with these regulations isn't to change the way America's trucks are powered but to get the best existing fuel-saving technologies to market as quickly as possible. "It's an OK first start," said Safe Climate Campaign director Dan Becker to The Hill today. "On the other hand, they left almost half of the emission reductions on the table." Photo by Sam Butler/flickr/Creative Commons Reprinted with permission from HybridCars

Post originale: http://featured.matternetwork.com/2010/10/administration-unveils-first-ever-efficiency.cfm