Displaying items by tag: Energy Efficiency

Cable and telecom operators have streamlined their operations and engineering organizations but the environment is still one of complex change. An external advisor can bring in the targeted resources to minimize operational impact and temporarily expand engineering resources to complete mission critical projects and tasks with no long-term impact on Opex...

This is the first of three blogs regarding setting Green House Gas (GHG) reduction targets.  It begins with a common situation.

It’s your first week as the newly minted Sustainability Manager for a fast growing mid-size company and the CFO sends you a one-liner via email - “GHG reduction target – recommendation?...need soon” You’re smart and senior enough to instantly recognize that this is a fairly complex topic that includes a bit of art but also a strong dose of science.  Given that, you work to buy yourself a couple of days before you respond so that you can brush up on the recent literature. 

The first lesson you note is the difference between an absolute target and one based on operational intensity like revenue or units sold. While the difference is basic you sense that the implications are immense regarding the way your company would go about meeting either objective. 

You like the simplicity the absolute target provides but you’re immediately wary of how your company might meet an absolute reduction given the growth goals you’re privy to. Oppositely, you like the ability of the intensity metric to scale with that growth. Additionally, you appreciate the industry comparability an intensity target provides. But what happens if the nearest competitors choose a different intensity metric? 

Hmmm…Since you’re at a standstill you table the choice regarding absolute or intensity target setting and continue toward other important, interrelated components of setting a target. 

Probably the most obvious component of the equation is what reduction target to choose. Should you choose 5%? What about 10%? Will numbers that small make a difference? Headlines? Perhaps we should go big and see what’s possible. Why not 50%?  Well, it’s more complicated than that. The answer depends on at least two additional inputs. 

Another important component is how long your plan extends. In other words, what’s the deadline? Again, you could choose a short time frame, say 3 years or a deadline 50 years out. It’s up to you.

At this point, you’re beginning to wonder if you might need GHG experts for support in making this recommendation. You can see business disciplines making justifications in opposite directions and it’s not hard to envision conflict and confusion as this process works its way through the company and externally to your stakeholders. 

Without a doubt, this decision carries many implications. 

To make some sense of the broader situation you put together a table of the top 10 performers from the Newsweek 2012 Green Rankings. You make a note of whether an absolute or intensity metric is used, what the reduction target was and the amount of time the companies allotted to meet the target. Your preliminary research returns the following information:

While the average, min and max of the first two columns are interesting you’re thoughts are directed toward the final, normalized column. In particular, you notice the small variance between the first seven companies (prior to Accenture’s big jump) which works out to a GHG reduction average of 2.1%/year. 

Feeling good about your ability to tease this data point out, but with even more questions than answers, you decide to call it a day and begin to sign out of your computer. Checking your email one last time you see an article from your MBA alma mater that reads: “Goals Gone Wild: The Systematic Side Effects of Over-Prescribing Goal Setting”

and wonder if the article could influence your reduction recommendation. You bookmark it, close your browser and head home. 

Be sure to read “Finer Points of Greenhouse Gas Goal Setting” in blog two of three to see what our character learns.

For those on either side of the political debate on climate change, the economics of reducing emissions is beginning to make good financial sense. Market realities, high fuel costs, and decreasing costs of alternative fuel vehicles, are all contributing to an environment where by conversion to alternative fuel vehicles (AFV) is becoming increasingly attractive. Add to the mix U.S. tax credits up to $7,500 per vehicle, and the numbers start to add up.

SunRidge Farms, a snack food maker in Royal Oaks California recently told Jennifer Wang of Entrepenuer.com, “We save 33 percent on fuel costs off the hybrids alone.” SunRidge began conversion to an alternative fuel fleet in 2004, as part of an overall sustainability strategy. Conversion to AFV typically reduces fuel consumption, which immediately reduces fuel costs. In addition to this, switching to alternative fuels such as electric or compressed natural gas (CNG) also reduces carbon emissions.

While the conversion to alternative-fuel vehicles may not suit every scenario, the increase in AFV sales is undeniable. U.S. sales in August nearly doubled, as automakers across the board are developing AFV technologies to compete with the ubiquitous Toyota Prius.

Chart Credit: Clean Cities Alternative Fuel Price Reports

The 2012 SCTE Cable-Tec Expo has already come and gone, but the follow-up activities arising from the week-long event are only just getting started. 

Besides serving as a venue for continuing professional education, SCTE’s Expo also makes for a great setting to develop new business opportunities. Hundreds of vendors, MSOs and other cable professionals pack the conference hall to check out the latest in cable technology, products and services. Content is tailored for technical workshops, exhibits and specialized pavilions to attract like-minded individuals to connect and find opportunities for collaboration.

This year, I had the opportunity to participate on the Expo Program Committee and moderate a panel under the SEMI track titled “Exploring Best Practices and Strategies to Achieve Efficiency in Fleet Energy Management.”  The panel featured industry veteran and President of opXL,LLC,  Mr. Tom Gorman, the Senior Manager of Tech Ops at Time Warner Cable, Mr. Jack Sheehan, and the Fleet Testing and Analysis Team Leader at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Mr. Kevin Walkowicz. These three gentlemen represent different walks of life in the cable industry but worked well together to provide their audience with critical insights and strategies to capitalize on fleet management tools like GPS and workforce management, an idle-time reduction program and open-source data-focused tools from the Department of Energy (DOE) designed to enable lower vehicle energy use.

A typical MSO’s fleet is the second largest contributor to its carbon footprint besides facility and network electricity. The fleet also represents a significant portion of the MSO’s operating budget, costing tens millions of dollars for fuel consumption alone. Given the important role fleet energy management has to play in reducing an MSO’s costs and emissions, I believe that this topic will receive even greater attention at the upcoming SEMI 2013 spring event and also at next year’s Expo.

The SCTE Cable-Tec Expo was a great opportunity to meet face-to-face with potential clients, customers, and industry experts. Meeting in person allowed for the opportunity to connect on a more personal level while encouraging creative business modeling and future planning. The next Expo might be a year away, but we’re already looking forward to another week of networking and growth in the Big Easy in September 2013. 

Coppervale will ensure you are paying the appropriate rates for the utility power you use. Whether your operations are based in regulated or deregulated energy markets, we have the experience to reduce your rates...