The first of these realizations is that vested interests tend to make us short-sighted in our assessments of the situation. By its nature, this is detrimental to the process and is true of both sides of the debate. It was perplexing to see both sides of the debate color the information to support their own personal perspective. For example, when one side would take the position that rules need to be based on peer-reviewed science, rather than conjecture, the opposing side would assert that there is a dearth of peer-reviewed evidence supporting the opposition’s view. Furthermore, it became clear that a person’s belief colored their review of the proposed rules, and that an impartial review and concession of points would not be the order of the day.

These observations led to the realization of the second point: developing wind project siting rules is clearly essential for the state of Wisconsin. Moreover, this process is rightly placed in the hands of the Public Service Commission and the State Legislature. Developing effective renewable resources, including wind, to meet the state’s renewable portfolio standard is critical for our state to move forward. Without clear state-level guidance, however, developing such resources may well not happen.

If we leave the process to the jurisdiction of individual municipal governments, the system would be susceptible to gaming and manipulation by all sides of the debate, which will necessarily result in less than optimal distribution of resources for the state. Statewide rules that are developed based on open debate and reviewed by the Public Service Commission and the state Legislature would ensure that all competing opinions are heard and taken into consideration and a system that satisfies the greatest majority of needs will be developed.

This brings me to the third thing I concluded during my observations last week. That is, simply put, people are bound to come away from this process disappointed and if we allow a short-sighted perspective to dominate our thinking on the issue, the state will pay a significant price in the long-run. Clearly the best compromise is to aim to develop rules that satisfy the needs of the greatest number of stakeholders in the process and accept the reality that the results will necessarily leave dissatisfied participants on both sides of the issue. In other words, it is essential that our leadership, in their endeavor to craft wind siting rules, does not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.

 The final point that struck me is the passion of all the parties involved in this debate and the unique challenges of balancing the rights of the people seeking to produce renewable energy on their property, with the health and safety concerns of the people impacted by the installation of the turbines with the reality that it is essential for the state to develop renewable energy resources. To this end, I was pleased to hear the presentation by Rep. Ted Zigmunt, D-Francis Creek, of Wisconsin’s 2^nd Assembly District. Zigmunt, whose district includes towns  that are affected by a highly contested wind project, testified that in the development of wind siting rules the Public Service Commission and Legislature should take into consideration the legitimate health, safety and economic concerns presented by certain renewable projects.

Moreover, Zigmunt pointed out that the recently passed Wisconsin Act 406, signed into law by Gov. Jim Doyle earlier this year, allows for a number of new technologies including geothermal, solar thermal and solar daylighting to be classified as renewable — which in turn can help the state meet its renewable energy needs, particularly in spaces where traditional renewable projects like wind, may not be appropriate — whether because of economic, health or safety concerns.

Rep. Zigmunt’s testimony demonstrates the kind of thought leadership that can provide the template for developing Wisconsin’s energy future.

These sources, when used in place of traditional coal-fired power plants, can prevent further damage to our environment by emitting fewer of the greenhouse gases that have been linked to acid rain, smog, and the depletion of the Earth’s ozone layer.

Wisconsin’s RPS requires that by 2015, 10 percent of the state’s electricity be generated from renewable resources, like from the energy sources listed above.

In addition to the technologies listed above, the legislation includes Orion’s direct-use renewable Apollo solar light pipe, which harvests daylight and focuses it to the facility floor using no electricity.

This forward-thinking legislation will position Wisconsin as a nationwide leader in energy efficiency and set a precedent for other states to include these innovative technologies in their policies and legislation.

But the legislation goes beyond simply creating an improved environment. The bill, dubbed the Wisconsin Energy Employment Act, also is designed to create jobs through the deployment and manufacturing of these innovative technologies.

For example, a facility near Green Bay utilizing the energy sources now included in the bill will employ 30 full-time employees in addition to the jobs created through the construction of the waste-to-energy facility. A plasma gasification facility in Milwaukee will generate electric and thermal energy while generating approximately 50 full-time jobs for Wisconsin workers. Up to 150 jobs will be created for the construction of the facility.

And Orion’s own Apollo solar light pipe is expected to create up to 2.8 million hours of work for contractors hired to install the technology.

This legislation will have far-reaching effects by improving the environment and creating jobs, which will directly impact the struggling economy.

With healthcare supplanting energy legislation at the federal level to the resignation of the United Nation’s top climate official, Yvo de Boer, to the state of Texas taking legal action against the EPA to gubernatorial candidate Tom Barrett calling for Wisconsin lawmakers to scale back global-warming legislation, the apparently principled argument in favor of climate change has been shifted. The line in the sand is redrawn.

And while the quibbling continues about where the line should be, China, Japan and Korea have quietly out-invested and surpassed the United States in many clean-energy areas.

All ideological debate aside, it would be foolish not to direct our resources toward technologies that will promote and provide sustainable development. Not only is this in our economic and national security interests as a nation, it just makes good sense to invest in innovations that green the planet as well as the bottom line. For example, the cost-effective solution of energy efficiency in buildings alone, could, according to the U.S. Green Building Council, reduce global green house gas emissions by 30 percent by 2020.

Alan Salzman, CEO of Vantage Point Venture Partners, summed it up well in a quote in Fortune Magazine by Brian Duamaine, Feb. 8, 2010, “We must ensure that our industrial policy — including laws, regulations, access to capital and incentives — enables the big industries of the 21^st century. It should not preserve and entrench 19^th-century ways of generating electricity, powering transportation and consuming our natural resources.”  Mr. Salzman’s advocacy of innovation cuts through the quagmire quickly to the point:  Clean-energy technology makes good economic, environmental and social sense for the 21^st century.

Alaska, one of the few remaining states — along with Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and West Virginia — in which neither the utilities nor the state provide any assistance for businesses deploying energy efficiency technologies, is considering changing that stance.

State Rep. Clarisse Millett, R-Anchorage, has recognized the value of energy efficiency for her state’s residents and businesses. She has gone as far as saying that energy efficiency is the “the low-hanging fruit, the quickest, most economical things that we [State government] can do as a state to make sure that our residents have every opportunity to save on energy costs.”

A recent plan that has been published by the Alaska Conservation Alliance details how the state can capture the significant economic and environmental benefits of the available energy efficiency potential in the state. In part, the program proposes that energy consumption be reduced through energy efficiency by 3.3 percent per year between 2010 and 2025. More than one-third of this annual reduction can come, as the report accurately identifies, from reducing lighting energy consumption. As has been noted on this blog before, traditional illumination sources consume more energy to deliver significant less light that modern high-bay lighting technology.

This push by Alaska shows that despite the publicity and political support that energy efficiency receives, the business sector and corporate decision-makers often still need an additional incentive to commit to these projects. Therefore, despite arguments to the contrary, it is highly unlikely that the efficiency market is saturated or fully transformed, and some or all energy efficiency incentives are no longer required.

In fact, the report by the Alaska Conservation Alliance contains an entire section detailing the case for energy efficiency for businesses. This clearly suggests that despite the great efforts and legitimate progress made, the energy efficiency market is by no means saturated or transformed. In fact, when one of the states synonymous with oil and gas production is seeking to capture efficiency gains, there still gains for all states to capture.

Orion Energy Systems commends the Alaska Conservation Alliance and political leaders like Rep. Millett for their efforts in advancing the benefits of the people of Alaska. Orion has been developing innovative energy-efficiency products and control solutions throughout its nearly 15 year history.

Throughout this history, Orion has seen firsthand the benefits that states experience when they open energy-efficiency incentive programs for their residents and businesses. Orion currently does business in all 50 states, Canada, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Brazil, Chile and China and has on average 81 projects per state. The five states that have not introduced incentives for energy efficiency have completed 102 projects total (Alabama-37, Mississippi-25, Louisiana-24, West Virginia-15, and Alaska-1).

On the inverse, of the top 10 states that Orion does business with (on average 350 projects per state); only Pennsylvania has had energy efficiency incentives for less than 1 year. For a state specific example of the impact of introducing energy efficiency incentives, consider the case of Illinois.

Orion’s energy efficiency projects in the state have increased by more than 100 percent since the introduction of incentives in June 2008 (from 211 projects prior as of June 30, 2008, to 442 projects in the state as of Dec. 31, 2009). This tremendous increase in project count has been more of the rule than the expectation in Illinois since the introduction of utility energy efficiency incentives as mandated by state legislation. The completion of 230-plus projects in 18 months in a state that had previously done only 200-plus projects in over 6 years testifies to the power of introducing energy-efficiency incentives into a state’s economy as the Alaska Conservation Alliance recommends. It also shows that Rep. Millett is correct in identifying energy efficiency as the “low-hanging fruit” in fostering economic growth and saving people money — both critical goals in any economic climate, but especially so in our current one.

This got me thinking about climate change legislation.

Unlike Campbell’s soup, climate change legislation has not been immortalized by Andy Warhol so it does not have that in its favor. Could legislators, however, take a cue from the Campbell’s playbook to figure out what prompts people to support climate change initiatives and finally legislation?

In its research, Campbell’s discovered that the image of the spoon on its label is unnecessary as it had little to do with emotional response.  What is the “spoon” equivalent in current climate change legislation that could be dispensed with to make it more ‘palatable’?

Adding steam to the image, it was discovered, helped people become more emotionally engaged with the product. What, then, is the steam needed to warm up (excuse the pun) the climate change legislation? What is the untapped emotional quotient of climate change?

I’m going to think about it over a nice, hot, steamy updated bowl of soup!

What is it that you think makes the climate change language less palatable to the general public and/or what will make climate change legislation more popular with the public?

Senate Bill 450 moves the existing 10 percent RPS requirement up from 2015 to 2013, and then goes on to require a 20 percent RPS by 2020 and 25 percent by 2025.

The Renewable Portfolio Standard is the portion of the bill that puts the jobs creation aspect of the legislation into motion. If one simply takes a look around at the number of “green collar” jobs created to date and the number of companies that exist because Wisconsin and other states have already adopted renewable standards, you can see and understand just why this is.

Here in Manitowoc, for example, a major segment of the Manitowoc Cranes market is the area of sales where their lift cranes are dedicated to the erection of wind generation. Manitowoc Cranes employs about 600 workers at all levels. Tower Tech is another even more obvious example of the market response to RPS regulation. Tower Tech builds wind generation towers for large scale wind generation. The company is new on the scene in Manitowoc having been established about six years ago. They are “order rich” and currently employ about 170 workers from shop floor to corporate leadership.

Our own company has benefited from RPSs established by state governments across the nation as energy efficiency reduces the total capacity requirements of utilities and, therefore, Orion products are incented by Wisconsin’s Focus On Energy and other similar programs. Orion currently has about 250 workers that design, produce and sell our products in our Manitowoc location and we also provide countless hours for sales and installation of our products to “vendor partners” nationwide.

Senate Bill 450 is 174 pages long and includes many, many complex ideas and negotiated areas of agreement. I participated in a WisconsinEye interview with three of the four Floor Managers of the Bill on Jan. 5 and what they all could agree on is that something will make it to the Governor’s desk regarding climate change and the potential to take advantage of an environmental problem to stimulate jobs growth.

View the Pros

View the Cons

WisconsinEYE is a non-profit, private public affairs cable network that covers state government and other issues of interest, including panels, town halls, and programs about state history.

The video features Crawford, Roy Thilly, co-chair of the Governor’s Task Force on Global Warming, state Rep. Jim Soletski, Rep. Spencer Black, and Sen. Mark Miller, talking about the bill and why it’s important to pass Gov. Jim Doyle’s proposed legislation.

Last week’s Orion updates talked mainly about the jobs creation aspects of SB273 and AB401, and the fact that this legislation is now included in the draft Climate Change Bill.

Of course, we talked about jobs for good reason:  14,500 more Wisconsinites found themselves out of work and unemployed in November and we know that passage of Orion’s “direct use renewable” legislation has the potential to create 1.4 million person-hours of work.  That’s a lot of unemployed getting off “the roles” and earning paychecks, particularly in the hard-hit construction field.

Orion agrees that the best “social program” for a family is a good paying job and we’re certainly working to do our part to get ALL of Wisconsin back to work.

At this critical time in our state’s history, with unemployment on the  rise, jobs creation is crucial to our common futures, but we need to view  this legislation with an environmental eye as well.  This past Spring the EPA announced that it believes that carbon dioxide and five additional greenhouse gases are dangerous to human health.

Experts word-wide are identifying the relationship between carbon dioxide emissions and increased instances of cancer, respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, allergies, and malnutrition.  In most cases, our children are most vulnerable.

Passage of the legislation that would include Orion’s Apollo® Solar Light Pipe in Wisconsin’s Renewable Portfolio Standard would not only create 1.4 million person-hours of work for our unemployed citizens, but it would also reduce our state’s carbon dioxide emissions by 146,000 tons each year.  SB273 and AB401 speak directly to two of our state’s most urgent needs:  jobs and citizen health.

Thanks.  Stay warm!

The markets of China and Japan are not just dynamic, they are huge. Did you know that China is Wisconsin’s #3 global trading partner and that Japan is #5? Particularly in China electrical energy demand is soaring and as a result, the need for advanced energy efficiency solutions has never been greater. To conduct business in the Pacific Rim, one can’t just go in guns blazing and expect to achieve success. Establishing and building a relationship is paramount. Yoshiaki Fujimori, President of GE Japan may have summed it up best, “A strategic alliance with a local firm is a good way to innovate in Japan.”

Like all good relationships, a foundation of trust and respect is essential for conducting Pacific Rim business. How to get started? Recognize and show respect for the unique and individual culture of the countryman with whom you are meeting. Awareness of and respect of another’s culture can make or break the deal. Remember, perceptions are powerful opinion makers especially when conducting international business. I am referring to simple demonstrations of respect here.

Of course, you have business cards. Always have business cards with you. In Japan, for example, a business card is essential for making a proper introduction. A business card is an extension of self … treat it with respect. Present your card with both hands, information facing the receiver. Receive a card with both hands and take a moment to study it. How you treat the business card of your new associate is perceived to be the way you will treat that business relationship. Never write on an associate’s business card or put it in your wallet/back pocket in their presence. Simple enough, right?

Another simple measure you can take is to have your name printed on your business cards in the language of your associate. The cards I travelled with announced my name in both Japanese and Chinese in addition to English. It is a simple, yet meaningful show of respect.

I always make sure to familiarize myself with some perfunctory greetings of the country I travel to as well. Try to speak some of the language, even if the only thing you can say is “hello” and “thank you”. Making an effort opens doors by showing respect for the language and culture, and therefore, your business associate.

Traveling with the Governor provided high level entrée in Beijing as well such as dinner at the Ambassador’s residence in addition to activities at the State Guest House.

Global groundwork demands an investment of time and travel, but is a crucial and worthwhile strategy for cultivating successful international business relationships.

Consider how rewarding to be asked, “How can I help you do business with my company?” and to hear, “I will be happy to report we have a good friend in Wisconsin.”

The bills act to include “direct-use” renewable technologies such as Orion’s Apollo® Solar Light Pipe in Wisconsin’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS).  Inclusion in the RPS will create new manufacturing jobs at Orion Energy Systems’ world headquarters in Manitowoc (WI) as well as across the state in the construction trades – the employment sector hardest hit in America’s economic downturn.

The companion bills, which have had public hearings in both the Assembly and the Senate this past September, have been included in the draft of the Climate Change legislation LRB -3883/1 that is slated to be introduced early in 2010.

Orion endorses both the independent legislation as well as the Climate Change legislation as jobs creation mechanisms.  This inclusion of “direct-use renewables” in Wisconsin’s Renewable Portfolio Standard will definitely put our state’s unemployed back to work.

Orion Energy Systems strongly encourages the passage of legislation that includes “direct-use renewables” in our state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard before the end of the 2010 winter/spring floor period, and the sooner the better.

Our legislature needs to act to put Wisconsin’s unemployed back to work!