The essence of carbon offsets is for an individual to donate to clean energy technologies with money equivalent to his or her CO2 usage. It is an invisible, but valuable exchange. For instance, running an average American household for two months comes out to a ton of CO2 emission. This ton of personal pollution can, for example, be absolved by moving 145 SUV drivers to hybrids for one year.  By donating as little as $100 a year to clean energy initiatives, Clean Air-Cool Planet claims the average American household can become “carbon neutral,” that is, convert its carbon use into dollars that go to pay for positive, carbon-free change.

The carbon offset market is intent to point out that counterbalancing your carbon output is not “feel-good” environmentalism, and investors should use caution. Carbonfund.org notes that consumers must reduce their CO2 emissions as much as possible, but a total elimination of the individual carbon footprint is impossible. For the leftover carbon use we can’t erase, there’s offsetting. Yet within offsetting, there is yet to be implemented an across-the-board market standard, and this puts consumers at risk when buying such an invisible commodity. The standard of excellence to look for in choosing a method of offsetting is, for one, something called “additionality.” Additionality means that the company is using the donated money to promote clean energy that could not have been accomplished without the donation.

For instance, a one-way flight from Los Angeles to Boston equals $9.44 in calculated carbon use. To effectively offset this waste, a company should put that entire amount toward a project that would not have been possible otherwise: in this way the return is directly proportionate to the carbon emitted by the consumer. Furthermore, the David Suzuki Foundation points out that not all offsets are created equal. Tree planting, a popular offset choice due to its low cost, does not address the dependence on fossil fuels, has a slower return, and is not as effective as donating to a solar or wind initiative.

Clean Air-Cool Planet’s Consumer’s Guide to Retail Carbon Offset Providers suggests that once consumers have reduced their carbon output as much as possible they should then calculate their remaining carbon use. Carbonfund.org provides a nifty calculator to instantly figure the carbon used for flights, car trips, electricity use, and even events with out-of-town guests and hotel stays. Your total carbon use put into dollars can then be donated to one of their sponsored projects, all of which are third-party verified to ensure additionality as well as permanence. The list of projects, which includes wind and solar energy, methane landfills, and conservation, promises to use the offsets to promote sustainable, permanent energy efficiency rather than band-aide fixes.

Many organizations are catching onto this idea, particularly in the travel sector. EasyJetparticipates in a carbon offset program that allows you to pay a couple of extra dollars on top of the flight to offset your airborne carbon use. Sustainable Travel International advocates travelers to offset their CO2, part of a trend in the responsible travel sector that goes beyond the now-standard eco-vacation. Carbon offsets may appear, to the weary environmentalist, to be yet another gimmick aimed at our consciences. It is not without its criticism: for instance, planting a tree in an unnatural climate with a credit card does perhaps worse for the climate crisis. By investing wisely and cutting all-around carbon emissions, however, the offsetter can feel safe in his or her decision.

Carbonfund.org makes it easy to offset in a safe way, but for buyers seeking to invest elsewhere, the Consumer’s Guide provides the buyer with stringent guidelines on how to be sure the offset is indeed offsetting as efficiently as possible. Buyers are advised to ask the provider about their dedication to additionality, transparency, permanence, and education. Once a provider is carefully chosen, the buyer should be sure to communicate with transparency about his or her carbon footprint and to watch his or her investment over time, as the provider and the carbon market change over time. (Source:http://www.theclimategroup.org/news_and_events/top_ten_tips_for_purchasing_carbon_offsets/)

So this Christmas, go to Carbonfund.org and purchase carbon offset gift cards for your friends and family. Time will tell if it will become all the rage in charitable giving. Lowering carbon emissions generated over the holiday season is a challenge, and stuffing stockings with a bunch of nothing is in some ways worse than coal.

The transmission aspect of energy needs a thorough analysis of some of the fundamental aspects of energy generation. Renewable energy differs significantly from conventional fossil fuel power in a number of ways. Fossil fuels are in effect energy stockpiles (i.e. they contain energy that has been amassed over millions of years).  Such stockpiles provide high flexibility and the freedom to time the conversion process and place of conversion. In other words it is possible to have a power station and thus a corresponding power grid in the middle of nowhere provided there are associated benefits.

Renewable energy, particularly solar and wind are not conventional stockpiles. Solar energy is periodic, variable but consistently available over a period of time and is virtually inexhaustible. The same could be said for wind with much less consistency. The process of energy conversion, in the case of renewable sources is thus, a dynamic energy conversion process as opposed to a static stockpile conversion in the case of fossil fuels.  It’s not possible to have a wind or solar farm anywhere you want, so the creation of a successful grid for transmission of renewable power would need a paradigm shift in process planning.

Specifically, this process needs a focus on energy capture, storage and monitoring of the energy generation process. Since renewable energy is dynamic, research into the domains of weather forecasting and impact of geography on energy output would be critical in predicting the associated energy output over an extended period of time.  Finally, integration of disperse power sources into a central grid would pose a critical challenge because existing grid mechanisms that have been in place for decades would need an upgrade.  For instance the European Grid was installed in the 1950s and was not designed for two way traffic or specifically to take input form numerous dispersed sources.

A popular grid management process is the vehicle to grid (V2G), process. This technology allows for a method of integration of electric vehicles and plug in hybrids to the existing power grid. Essentially it allows for flow of electricity from car’s battery to power lines and vice versa. In a V2G mode, the car battery charge increases or decreases depending on the grids energy demand. Thus the battery acts as a “sponge “and provides an alternative to reduce utilities expense on generating stations for balancing the grid. Additionally the V2G technology allows for charging of the battery as well.

University of Delaware is investigating V2G concepts that would allow for mass adoption of the technology. Willett Kempton, UD associate professor of marine policy and a V2G pioneer says “A car sitting there with a tank of gasoline in it, that’s useless. If it’s a battery storing a lot of electricity and a big plug that allows moving power back and forth quickly, then it’s valuable.” And exactly how valuable is it ? Well it takes utilities an estimated $4000 an year to maintain grid balance. Utilizing car batteries, for grid management would mean saving on this expense partly and thus a fraction of the saving could be given to the car owner.

So in essence, if you have an electric car, you could get paid for charging its batteries!  It’s not without some challenges though. The biggest is having an efficient battery technology for electric cars. Additionally, integration of several localized batteries into a grid would be a huge process, the reliability of which is unclear.

There have been developments towards achieving a smart grid.  GridPoint , a leading clean tech company is engaged in providing smart grid platforms to optimize grid management. The platform offered by GridPoint leverages IT to provide utilities an efficient network of distributed energy sources. Additionally some countries are also progressing towards adoption of smart meters.  Countries such as Italy and Sweden anticipate a full installation of smart meters by year 2009.  This technology is also being introduced on a large scale in Denmark, Finland and Austria.

The future of smart grids would largely be IT driven. A smart grid would essentially allow for a dynamic two way interaction between power consumers and generators. The grid would also assimilate information regarding anticipated power generation as a function of local weather conditions and leverage heavily on the power of internet in the coming decade.

John McCain has announced $300 million prize money to the inventor of an efficient car battery to power hybrid and electric vehicles which includes plans to offer tax credits to consumers (up to $5,000), to make hybrids and electric cars an attractive buying option. The funds required for this plan would translate to roughly $1 in tax for every man, woman and children in the country, which according to Mc Cain is “a small price to pay for helping to break the back of our oil dependency”.

However, McCain did not elaborate on the impact of this initiative or his approach and plans to lower the US fiscal deficit. In addition, the parameters for judging the efficiency of batteries, as defined by McCain are vague and obscure. The prize money would be awarded to a battery system that delivers required power at 30% of the current costs and has” the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric” This approach has a fundamental flaw because the current market for hybrids is not explicitly defined and the performance of a hybrid is open to a wide array of interpretations.

Hybrid or electric vehicle performance is generally measured by the power delivered by them, their range of operation and their capacity to vary power according to demand. There is currently no universally accepted benchmark to gauge the performance of hybrids and electric vehicles. Additionally this policy completely ignores alternative power technologies such as ultracapcitors, which hold immense potential to power hybrid vehicles. As Gerband Ceder, professor of materials science and engineering at MIT says, “It’s hard to measure without a benchmark,” and promptly dismisses McCain’s new plans as a “political stunt”. Secondly, only zero emission cars would qualify for maximum tax credits of $5000. Hence, only fuel cell powered cars would qualify as zero emission vehicles and entail maximum tax credit. However, these are currently very expensive and well out of the reach of the masses.

McCain in his zeal to promote electric and hybrid vehicles fails to see the other end of the spectrum on this issue in my opinion. Assuming a mass adoption of such cars, there would be a tremendous demand for electricity to charge up such vehicles. McCain’s advisor Doug Holtz-Eakin suggests that such cars could be plugged in at night when energy demand is the lowest. He also suggested that the energy required to power up these vehicles could come from clean-coal and nuclear power plants. This approach certainly addresses the issue. However, a comprehensive analysis of the clean power generation and utilization for hybrids and electric vehicles is imperative before their adoption. The lack of such a roadmap would essentially mean that we are trading tail pipe emissions form cars to more wastes from coal/nuclear plants.

Although beset with a number of challenges as highlighted above, McCain’s new initiative is laudable as it steps away (even if only slightly!) from his “oil for energy” philosophy.  $300 million represents a substantial increase when compared to U.S. Department of Energy(DOE) previous expenditure on battery technology. In 2008, (DOE) devoted nearly $50 million to research and development for vehicle-related energy storage. Critics say that instead of being given away as prize money this amount should be directly invested in research and development activities

Hybrids employ a combination of the ICE and the battery for power generation. An onboard computer processor is employed that determines the right combination of battery and ICE under varying conditions of operation. Such an arrangement however is complicated and adds to the cost of the vehicle. Furthermore, batteries need to be charged repeatedly and replaced frequently, adding to the cost. Proponents of hybrids argue that their high cost would be offset by the reduced use of gasoline over a period. They however stop short on the cost incurred on battery charging.

Thus, the challenge in commercialization of hybrid technology may be considered a classic chicken and egg problem. In order to reduce manufacturing costs there has to be an increase in volume (the number of units sold), which is possible only with a decrease in price.

In this regard, it is heartening to note the availability of financial incentives in the US for boosting the sale of hybrid vehicles. A significant federal tax credit of twelve thousand dollars is currently available on purchasing of certain basic hybrid vehicles. Some states and municipalities also provide additional tax relief and incentives to specific hybrid vehicles. Rhode Island tax credit for electric vehicles and Oregon business energy tax credit are some major programs. The state of California also provides emission reduction funding to certain hybrid vehicles, if these are used primarily in California.

The advantage of such tax credits was identified early by Toyota unlike carmakers like GM, Ford and Honda. In early 2005, Toyota had a strategy for the sale of nearly 100,000 units of Pirius whereas Honda anticipated sale of only about 20000 units of its Accord hybrid. Toyotas vision paid off and the sale of its Pirius model accounted for nearly half of the total hybrid sale in year 2006. Toyota is now lobbying with the Australian government for incentives to produce the next generation hybrid - Toyota Camry. Toyota aims at production of Camry by 2011 for Asian markets. Emboldened by the success of Toyota, other carmakers are also running to grab a pie of the hybrid market.

Hybrid Technologies (HT) a company founded in 2000 and headquartered in Mooresville, N.C aims to develop, and manufacture lithium based battery systems for a variety of vehicles such as scooters, mopeds, and passenger cars.  HT seems to have taken a very bullish attitude towards the hybrid vehicle segment as evident by a large variety of electric vehicles in its product lineup.  At the top of its product lineup is the magnificent sports car – LiV. The international automotive supplier, Continental also plans to launch the production of lithium-ion batteries for hybrid vehicles by 2008.

These batteries are expected to be utilized in the Mercedes S class Blue hybrid. Ford Company is also embarking on a major revamp process to kick-start the development of mass produced hybrids. It has recently purchased a majority interest in the in Norwegian-based PIVCO industries known for its “Think” prototype.

So, do hybrids provide the only alternative for environment friendly power? Definitely not, research is also being pursued for development of vehicles that operate on power of fuel cells, or completely on electricity. Honda motors recently unveiled its fuel cell powered vehicle FCX clarity at the Los Angeles auto show. GM has also developed its Chevrolet Equinox FCEV (Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle).

Furthermore, the impact of hybrids on the environment is not clear. The efficiency of hybrid is dependent on the extent of utilization of battery power. The greater employment of battery power, lesser the use of ICE .This in turn would entail smaller consumption of gasoline and consequently lower emissions. However, greater utilization of batteries would also imply frequent charging. The charging of batteries is done through electricity mostly generated by fossil fuel powered electric stations. Therefore, in a sense hybrids would involve trading of lower emissions from vehicles and passing them to the power stations. Further research and development may be instrumental in determining the “green” efficiency of the entire hybrid vehicle operation.

The Smart Car solves many of the problems of navigating the urban jungle. It is a bite-sized nugget of a car that was designed by a Swatch manufacturer to careen through windy, narrow European streets and to fit into a fraction of a parking space. In fact, two Smart Cars can fit into one parking space, and when it comes to fuel efficiency they get 33 mpg in the city and 41 mpg on the highway. While an all-electric Smart is in the works, for now the perks of the Smart Car are its gas efficiency and its compact nature. That being said, the Smart is essentially a moped with a roof. While it’s a smart product, the percentage of people the Smart Car caters to is about the size of its trunk.

Coming in three models, the Smart Fortwo Pure, the Smart Fortwo Passion Coupe, and the Smart Fortwo Passion Cabriolet, Smart Cars are just about the opposite of the mid-life crisis car. Speed peaks at 84, as its size combined with a lead foot make it a safety hazard. Consumers report that wind from bigger automobiles on the road sway the Smart, and its zero-to-sixty in 13 seconds puts it in a dangerous position on the highway entrance ramp. Worse, its boxy shape pushes the boundaries of style, sort of like the PT Cruiser. As much as they try, they just won’t ever be able to sit at the lunch table with the cool kids. Despite the success of the Smart Car in Europe, critics prophesy gloom and doom for the Smart: its “efficient” and “convenient” features are neither efficient nor convenient for most Americans. Americans value large amounts of private space, and for many the car is a roving home. No one can deny that the Smart is not ideal for the majority of Americans who tow kids to school, shop for a week’s worth of groceries, and travel vast distances to visit family.

The Smart is, unfortunately, counter-intuitive for suburban and rural America, dwarfed by its over-developed peers on the highway and stylistically odd. Its popularity struggles against hybrid technologies, like the Toyota Prius and the Honda Civic Hybrid, which are flying off the lot. When compared to members of its fuel-efficient genus, the Smart comes in behind the Prius and Civic at 36 mpg combined highway and city driving, as opposed to 46 mpg and 42 mpg combined, respectively. But with a price tag at $11,590 for the Pure and $16,590 for the Cabriolet, it is a more fiscally conservative investment.

The futuristic nature of the Smart Car is its blessing and curse: it is the most socially responsible way to drive, but it can’t matriculate into the mainstream American market. The best place to be a Smart owner is in the city, where trips are short, parking is limited, and smog hovers. (However, in some cities parking two Smarts into one space is illegal, actually creating a waste of space!) Like the Mini Cooper, women, who look like Barbie dolls in the convertible Cabriolet, are more of a target market than men, who look stuffed into a matchbox car like Jean Reno in the 2006 Pink Panther remake. Despite the size, the Smart is considered to have plenty of legroom and a panoramic moon roof that gives the illusion of space. The modest trunk can fit a grocery load or luggage, and the front seat folds down for extra capacity.

The Smart Car’s funky features may be impractical for some and an eyesore for others, but Smart drivers cause heads to turn. It may not be the BMW Z4, but consumers report receiving interested, good-natured comments, questions, and chuckles at stoplights and parking lots. Like the VW Bug (“it’s ugly, but it gets you there”), the Smart could be a harbinger for the future of American driving. As fuel prices increase, we can hope that cars will begin to get smaller again, to the point that maybe soon the Smart will actually be the smartest car out there.

We, the people, love to shop. But on average, just sixth months after purchasing consumer goods just one percent remains. It’s true: 99 percent of goods bought by Americans is in the dump half a year later. Food, light bulbs, packaging, clothes, electronics – due to “planned obsolescence” and “perceived obsolescence” sooner or later all the products we buy go back into the ground to begin a much longer life of disuse, decay, and toxin emission.  

A sustainable approach to this problem is, of course, to break out of this cycle. But sustainability is a two-way street: we should produce and live off of only what we need and yet not pull the rug out from under the systems already in place. Luckily, an increased number of groups recognize the role of the consumer economy in the US and still realize the desperate need to break the cycle of production and waste, which violates the environment, fair trade, and even our own happiness as consumers. If shopping really makes everyone happy, then why do we live in Prozac Nation?

Well, don’t run for the bottle yet. You don’t even need to run for the off-grid hills. There is a way to participate in mainstream culture without creating waste – in fact, it meansconsuming waste. A number of companies are selling recycled fashion, accessories and home goods in response to the earth in crisis. Furthermore, the concepts of fair trade and organics are becoming more mainstream as consumers begin to realize the human and health consequences of their purchases. Here are some ways that we ourselves can go post consumer waste.

Bag it up

You re-use your plastic bags and carry your groceries in canvas totes. Great! Now try wearing your plastic bags loud and proud. Green crafters are figuring out ways to crochet plastic shopping bags into durable, washable, fashionable sacks. Crafty types can actually design and make their own bags by following these fairly simple directions. Since plastic shopping bags take about a billion years to decompose, these creations are sturdy enough to carry a laptop. And depending on the color selection at your local supermarket, bags can be designed in earthy brown, sea glass green, or simple white with ribbons weaved in.

For those who don’t-do-it-yourself, the green fashion industry has come out with scores of styles of bags made out of recycled inner tubes, newspapers, billboards, and gum wrappers.English Retreads proves that eco fashion doesn’t have to mean hemp and patchouli. This company takes used bicycle tire inner tubes and turns them into purses and bags that actually look like sleek black leather. Not only that, but English Retreads prides itself on recycled, animal-free products in production and distribution, fair wages and conditions, and it doesn’t offshore its work. Bags start around $60.

Melt it down

According to Alkemie, a jeweler that creates its pieces from reclaimed gold, the mining industry is the second largest contributor to greenhouse gases. Their designs combine the delicate and the funky, like Alkemie bracelet or necklace with gold leaves which combines a light, pretty gold design with the edginess of leather.

Designer recycled fashion wears a price tag, but green fashionistas advocate opening up minds and dumpsters to find the beauty within. Jewelry artist Linsy Carranza designs gorgeous jewelry out of Scrabble tiles, and Felicia Singkang creates classy rings out of vintage buttons. Neat designs like these can be made at the kitchen table with some wire, glue, and a good idea.

Roll it out

One minute you’re drinking from it, the next you’re sitting on it? Well, not so fast, but one of the coolest trends in eco décor is the recycled soda bottle rug. These rugs, which come in gorgeous oriental patterns and are perfect for patios, decks, and tile floors, are comfortable and washable and 100 percent PCW. 4×6 sized doormats are priced at just $32.95 onwww.goodcommonsense.net, with the 5×8 size at $70 and the 6×9 at $80. Similar rugs are available through eco-friendly outfitters at comparable prices.

As if a recycled rug weren’t enough, soda bottles are getting a second life in clothing, too. Perhaps best of all is the recycled soda bottle suit from Israeli-based Bagir. The ECOGIR Recycled suit is made from 100 percent PCW from discarded PET bottles. Bagir also sells the ECOGIR Oganic suit, made of organic cotton, bamboo and ecologically-harvested Tagua nuts for buttons, and the ECOGIR hybrid, made of 55 percent PCW.

For more ideas and products, check out http://www.recycle2art.com/ to turn trash into treasure and http://www.econsciousmarket.com/site/ where “giving is the new getting.”

Whether you are building a new home or simply trying to improve the home you already have, here are some tips that will help you “go green” in every room.

All Through the House

The most important step you can take to make your home more earth-friendly is to save energy. Did you know that much of the energy you pay for is not actually used? Instead, it leaks out through windows, doors, and even walls and ceilings if they don’t have adequate insulation. Just imagine what that does to your utility bill! According to the US Department of Energy, only 20% of homes built before 1980 are adequately insulated. If yours is older, you probably need to get it reinsulated. Energy efficient windows are also an excellent idea. If you can’t afford to replace them, at least re-caulk them to keep air from seeping out through the cracks. These simple changes will create a win-win situation for you, your pocketbook and the planet. For the same reasons, don’t skimp on the insulation if you are building a house from scratch.

If you are building a home, also ask the builder if it’s possible to orient the windows so that they take advantage of winter sunlight to save on heating. If he or she doesn’t know what you’re talking about, get a new builder. Efficient design means your home will take less energy to heat and cool. Ideally, windows and window treatments such as blinds and curtains can be used to your advantage, letting heat in when it’s cold and shutting the sun out when it’s hot.

Also, watch out for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including formaldehyde, benzene and toulene. Carpets, paints and wood cabinets can all emit VOCS into the air you and your family breathe for years after they are installed. Fortunately, VOC-free paints and carpeting are available.

The Living Room

The modern living room is becoming one of the biggest energy hogs in the whole house. Home theater systems and other appliances can suck power, even when they are not being used. To stop the energy drain, unplug them, or use a power strip to turn them off completely.

Also, get a ceiling fan to help air circulate-you’ll save energy no matter what season it is.

The Bathroom

Yes, you can green your john. For starters, when it comes to a flushing toilet, Americans tend to believe that “bigger is better.” We want to hear whitewater rapids whenever we pull the lever, but it really isn’t necessary to waste that much water. Try a low-flush or dual-flush toilet instead. For an even more environmentally-friendly toilet experience, get a composting toilet. They don’t waste any water, they produce lovely compost for your garden, and unlike the smelly toilets you might remember from childhood trips to the beach, the new models are hygienic and odor-free. Although still a novelty, they are becoming more popular. Models by BioLet are even available at Home Depot!

The Kitchen

To create an energy-efficient kitchen that you’ll enjoy cooking in, make sure that the area includes as many windows as possible. During the day, sunlight will provide free natural light. As you cook, open the windows to vent cooking fumes in the most energy-efficient way possible.

To cut down on the amount of trash you produce, make space for recycling and composting. If you don’t like the idea of carrying out compostables to the backyard, a kitchen worm bin or composter can make salvaging food scraps a little bit more convenient.

Also, go for flooring made from renewable resources, such as bamboo or Forest Stewardship Certified wood.  Wood floors have the added benefit of being easy to clean without toxic cleaning products that can escape into the environment-and the air you breathe!

The Bedroom

In the bedroom, energy use can once again be addressed as described above. For bedding, wool or down comforters make an excellent choice that can help keep you snug even with the thermostat turned down during the winter. In summer, breathable combed organic cotton keeps you cool and absorbs perspiration, again reducing the amount of energy you’ll need to stay comfortable.

Perhaps the Internet is far more powerful than anyone could have predicted. Google’s nifty applications that make research and communication faster than the 0.23 seconds it takes us to reach for our mug of quadruple espresso skim latte have revolutionized our daily tasks. If the Internet can change everyone’s life to be more energy efficient, why can’t it change the world?

Google.org is responding to the global crises that, in the past few years, have brought the industrialized world to start to realize the implications of its actions. Among the most pressing global issues facing Americans is climate change, and talk of the earth’s impending doom is stoked by exorbitant fuel prices, meteorological phenomena and insufficient environmental policy. To address this, Google.org has developed two programs, “Develop Renewable Energy Cheaper than Coal (RE and “Recharge It”.

Recharge It looks like a science fair project with real potential. What they’re recharging are cars. Yes, the future of automotives means plugging your car into an electricity outlet and nearly eliminating the need for gas and oil, and hence, reducing CO2 emissions. The plug-in car endorsed by the Recharge It team has already been tested and proven, and according to the team the car, which charges over night for in-town driving, but has  gasoline back-up for longer trips, is ready to hit the road. The only obstacle facing Recharge It is the current lack of electricity able to power up these projects on a country-wide scale. But of course, Google has thought about that.

RE

Google.org seems to recognize that the global endemic crises are not isolated, but intertwined with one another. And so, while they focus on developing clean energy in America, the rest of their projects primarily involve investing in the developing world. “Predict and Prevent”,  “Inform and Empower to Improve Public Services” and “Fuel the Growth of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises” focus on the dismal health, educational, and economic situations in the developing world, particularly in Southeast Asia.

Google has $85 billion in investments: $20 million of that is going toward research and development of alternative clean energies in the United States, while the majority of funds are being dispersed to research and policy centers, non-governmental organizations, and institutes that are invested in the developing world. In addition, nearly $4 million is being invested in the disaster recovery efforts in China, Burma, and New Orleans.

The scope of Google.org’s project is massive and even mind-boggling to those of us who are trying to comprehend the enormity of the world’s problems – let alone solve them. Where the government has failed and charities have fallen short, Google’s monstrous budget steps in. But while money may be the main factor in achieving some semblance of hope for the planet’s future, what Google really cares about is information: “Better information can help governments and other providers spend scarce resources wisely. And, empowered by information, citizens and communities can demand better services from providers or develop new solutions to meet their own needs”. The information superhighway that Google revolutionized is now being brought to the underserved clinic, the under-resourced school, back to the governments that will be demanded to change, and practically to the moon. Better yet, to the sun.

There are several different ways that companies can adjust their operations to benefit the environment. Read on to which companies are making an impact in each area. The standouts in some of these fields may surprise you!

1. Reducing Carbon Emissions: Carbon dioxide is the most important greenhouse gas. In 2002, the US alone emitted 6,862 million tons of the stuff, according to carbonfund.org. Businesses can do their part by reducing the amount of emissions they produce, often by becoming more efficient and burning fewer fossil fuels. For example, Continental Airlines has invested heavily in reducing emissions, adding fuel-saving devices that can reduce emissions by 5% to the wings of many of its planes. Wal-Mart has also won the wary admiration of some environmentalists by taking steps to reduce emissions. First, the company took steps to improve its fuel efficiency by 25%, according to the Sierra Club. This action alone resulted in a savings of 400,000 tons of CO2/year. The company is also using its mafia-like powers to encourage its suppliers to cut their emissions, making them an offer they can’t refuse-better placement on the shelves in exchange for better environmental practices.

2. Taking responsibility for products: For some companies, it’s not just the energy cost of doing business, but rather the products themselves that are a concern. For example, electrical devices like cell phones and computers seem innocuous enough, but they contain toxic heavy metals and other substances that cause problems when the devices are thrown away. Companies in industries that make products like this can go green by reformulating the products, and/or by taking responsibility for disposing of them after their lifespan is over. For example, S.C Johnsonhas reformulated several of its big-name cleaning products, as well as its plastic wrap, to remove volatile organic chemicals and other pollutants. So, next time you’re at the store and can’t find your favorite “all-natural, biodegradable, eco-friendly cleaner,” don’t feel guilty about grabbing a bottle of one of their products instead. In the computer industry, Hewlett-Packard is known for its recycling program, which keeps the toxic components of computers from leaching out into the environment.

3. The three R’s: reduce, reuse and recycle: Reducing packaging or making it biodegradable can help reduce the amount of trash that ends up in landfills. Here again, Wal-mart has used its corporate muscle to take the initiative, vowing to sell only super-concentrated laundry detergent to reduce packaging. Also, Method cleaning products helped to counter the trash-producing disposable cleaning cloth craze with its O-Mop product. This product resembles the popular Swiffer, but its dust-attracting cleaning cloths are actually made of cornstarch and will break down in your compost heap. For wet-mopping, the O-mop uses washable microfiber cleaning pads instead of disposable wet-wipes. Also, many companies have their own recycling programs. For example, Bank of America’s recycling program saves approximately 200,000 trees each year. Wal-Mart offers recycling bins in some its stores, for customer wanting to drop off cans and plastic bottles.

4. Encouraging innovation: Let’s face it-reducing our current energy use can only take us so far. To solve the climate crisis, we have to develop new ways of producing energy that don’t rely on fossil fuels. So, one of the most powerful ways that businesses can help the environment is by pioneering new technologies or by investing in them. For example, Tesla Motors developed an electric car that is not only emissions-free, but fast and sexy, too. Now, if only they could make it affordable… Google is investing in companies that promise to create competitive sources of renewable energy, and has partnered with other companies in the computer industry to develop more efficient machines.

At one time, Wal-Mart was the bane of environmentalists, and the Sierra Club-sponsoredWalmartwatch.com takes the position that even though they are doing better over the past couple of years, they haven’t gone nearly far enough to make up for the past 4 decades of abuse. The website offers a fact sheet that details many of Wal-Mart’s less savory environmental practices. So, just because they are cited in this article does not mean that there’s no room for improvement. However, we can’t succeed in cleaning the planet up without cooperation, voluntary or otherwise, from corporate giants like Wal-Mart. If we don’t give credit where credit is due, there’s no incentive for companies to change their environmental attitudes.

As founder of SelfInvestors.com my expertise lies in discovering emerging growth companies and providing insight into investing in these companies based on sound fundamental & technical analysis. With my new project here at GET, I look forward to focusing on the green side of things : ) Hope you enjoy my research!

Part I: Electric/Hybrid Cars: Toyota Prius

Electric, hybrid, plugin electric hybrid.. whatever you want to call them, variations of hybrid and electric cars have been gaining rapid popularity with the commercial success of the Toyota Prius along with skyrocketing fuel prices.  In part I of this report I’m going to focus on Toyota Motors (TM).  In future reports, I’ll take a look at Honda Motors (HMC), smaller, over the counter companies like Zap as well those companies that stand to benefit by being parts suppliers.  Please be advised that these reports aren’t meant to be 100% comprehensive.  My hope is that I provide a framework for the big ideas with knowledgeable commenters filling in any gaps.

We are clearly just in the beginning stages of the green car movement, with early models offering a gas/electric mix of power with no external charging needed.  These kinds of models get good gas mileage at around 40mpg, but that isn’t exactly exceptional.  What we’ll begin to see over the next few years are plugin hybrids that offer much greater gas mileage with perhaps decreased performance from a vareity of manufacturers as the big US automakers finally wake up and realize what consumers want (see Chevy Volt)

First Mover Advantage

Toyota was the first to produce a commercially viable hybrid car and to this day it’s the most popular hybrid model available with the Prius waiting list still anywhere from a month to two months in many places.  The car was first made available in Japan all the way back in 1997 and first introduced to the US in 2001.  Talk about impeccable timing on Toyota’s part.  The war in Iraqhad yet to begin and the price of gas was well below $2/barrel at around 1.70.  With gas prices skyrocketing the green movement catching fire, the company has sold more than one million of the hybrids and plans to sell a million a year beginning in 2010.  In 2007, the sales of the Prius nearly doubled over 2006 with a 70% increase in sales.

What’s next on the horizon for Toyota?  The company plans to introduce two new hybrids at the 2009 Detroit Auto Show, one a completely new Toyota, the other a Lexus.  It also plans to introduce the 3rd generation Prius in 2009.  Later this year the company plans to introduce its stop-start technology to its gasoline engines which provides 10%  greater fuel efficiency than its current hybrid engines.  Further out, the company expects to provide the first plugin hybrid using lithium ion battery technology, but in limited quantities sometime in 2010.

What does Toyota look as an investment?  For starters, Toyota (ticker TM) is certainly one of the safest ways to play the green car boom.  It’s a big blue chip type stock with a fantastic brand name and in a time when most major automakers are on the verge of going under, Toyota continues to thrive.  In fact, the company has posted profit growth in every single year this decade.. truly amazing for auto manufacturer that is currently doing close to 200 billion in sales a year.  However, there are problems that have come up recently.  In it’s most recent earnings report, the company reported a decline in growth over the year ago quarter and expects growth to be off 30% in fiscal 08, significantly worse than the company or analysts expected.  The company attributes the disappointing projections to an increasingly strong Yen, a slowing US economy and rising raw materials and the company will undoubtedly face increasing competition in the hybrid/electric car market.   On the bright side, the company is making significant inroads into emerging markets, specifically China where it expects to offset any weakness in the US.

In terms of strategy, I base my buy and sell decisions on simple supply and demand which is revealed in the charts through price and volume.  Taking a look at Toyota reveals the stock is off nearly 40% over the past year and a half and is still mired in a long downtrend.  Here’s the key: the stock market looks about 6 months ahead.  Much of the negative outlook has been priced in over the past year, so if you think Toyota still has a bright future, now might be a good time to watch close for an entry.  It’s still in a basing pattern and could bounce around between support at 95 and resistance around 105 before emerging from this downtrend in a couple months.

For more on Toyota Motors, check out WikiInvest

Disclaimer: No stock analysis here at GreenEnergyTrends.com is a recommendation to buy or sell.   Please do your own research.  I currently own no position in Toyota Motors (TM)

In Part II to be posted in a couple days, I’ll take a look at the other big player in the hybrid market right now, Honda Motors.