Energy Innovation in the United States

Final Student Policy Recommendations June 13-19 2010 Keystone, CO

Energy Innovation in the U.S.

About Youth Policy Summit
The pow er of Youth Policy Summit lies in the ambition of its alumni. Young w omen and men come to the Summits as students, curious and ready to learn. They leave, after a w eek of intensive study and collaboration, active and inspired citizens of their local communities, our nation, and the w orld. In June 2010, The Keystone Center hosted the National Energy Innovation Summit for forty high school students w ho are part of the National Consortium for Specialized Secondary Schools of Math, Science and Technology. Ten high schools from across the nation came together in Keystone, Colorado to address the challenges, opportunities and concerns associated w ith developing consensus-based policy recommendations for energy issues in the United Sates. After researching divergent stakeholder groups and various aspects of the energy puzzle, students spent a w eek ardently discussing the possibilities for sustainable solutions to meet current and future energy demands of our nation. During the Summit, participants took stock of the larger technical, legal, environmental, social, economic, and political problems and shared their ow n research to prioritize issues and options. They interacted w ith leaders in the fields of energy, government, and the non profit sector w ho are actively grappling w ith these same issues day to day. With guidance from professional educators and facilitators from Keystone’s Center for Education and Center for Science and Public Policy, students created viable solutions to a problem that is confounding policy makers nationally. This report represents the results of the students’ deliberations: a written set of recommendations that w ill be shared w ith leaders in education, policy, energy, youth development and government. These young leaders received training and practice in skills essential for the 21st century work force such as critical thinking, creativity, leadership, negotiation, and innovation. Freshly aw are of their ow n potential for leadership and change, the students are inspired to take their recommendations to leaders in their ow n communities, demonstrating the undeniable pow er of working together. Since 2004, The Keystone Center has conducted YPS programs for over 500 young leaders from 23 states across the nation. Topics focus on current issues facing our nation in the areas of energy, environment and public health. With eight Summits planned across the nation for 2011, w e encourage teachers, students, priv ate and public organizations and government leaders to visit to learn about opportunities available in your region and how to get involved.


Energy Innovation in the U.S.

Table of Contents
Overview of Student Research 5

Su mmary Timeline and Introduction


Economics: Subsidy Reform Education: Public Awareness and Workforce Training Fossil Fuels: Transportation and Electricity Nuclear Power: New Technology and Increased Production Renewable Energy: Implementation and Storage Energy Efficiency: Commercial, Industrial and Residential Buildings Conclusion: Looking Forward, 2050 and Beyond Bibliography Acknowledgements








50 56


Energy Innovation in the U.S.

“Keystone allowed me, as an up and coming member of society, to express and share my views, talents, experiences, as well as my culture in a meaningful and constructive way that is more likely to affect a policy change.”
-Andreas Kofler, Participant


Energy Innovation in the U.S.

Overview of Student Research
The Group’s Task What should be done, and by whom, to bring about the changes necessary to meet the growing energy demand, while simultaneously growing the workforce and significantly limiting the emissions of greenhouse gases? Participants should consider three time frames: near-term (4-8 years), mid-term (10-20 years), and long term (up to 50 years).
To begin answering these questions, students were asked to research the following energy topics prior to their arrival at the Summit. As a group, the participants became experts on the current issues, barriers and opportunities as they exist today in the United States.

Electricity-Renewable (Solar, Wind, Biomass, Geothermal, etc) Electricity-Fossil Fuels (Coal, Natural Gas, Carbon Capture and Storage, etc) Electricity-Nuclear (New and existing technology for production and waste storage) Transportation-Fuels (Including gas, electric, batteries and renewables, etc) Transportation-Public, Private, Commercial, Industrial (Trains, bus, subways, passenger cars, shipping, etc) Buildings Efficienc y- Residential, Commercial, Industrial (Products, behavior, systems, etc) Education and Workforce Development (What options exist to train and develop a new workforce and educate the general population for behavior changes associated with Energy Innovation)


and to what degree government should intervene in the economy and society. Describes how.Energy Innovation in the U. Social. including environmental. environmental justice (are some impacted more than others) Environmental. demographic differences.  Public Sector. including federal. Legal. Stakeholder Assignments In addition to their energy research topics.S.  Academia. including corporations and organizations that are in the energy production or transmission sector. The laws of the land. and impacts from climate change. state and local government agencies  Private Sector. consumer advocacy groups. Includes cultural aspects. Encompasses all impacts on the environment. coalitions and social justice groups who are non – profits. Includes economic growth. Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) composed of environmental groups. Includes the rate of technological change and impacts from research and development. Congress and the State Legislature enact laws and the US Environmental Protection Agency and state environmental agencies create their own regulations to limit some activities and encourage others. Education and Research institutions  6 . each student was asked to represent the interests of an important stakeholder involved in the energy conversation. inflation and taxes. as well as health and safety and discrimination laws and regulations. provide engineering services or manufacturing for energy sector or who are large consumers of energy. Technological. Economic. including air and water quality. PESTLE Analysis To broaden the depth of their research. students worked in groups to perform a PESTLE analysis of each research topic listed on page 5 Political.

Education and Training: American Society of Heating. Renewable Energy Companies: Applied Materials General Electric Energy Vestas Siemens SunPower First Solar Ormat United Technologies 5. Office of Research. Energy Ge nerators and Consumers: Constellation Energy American Electric Power Exelon Southern Company Exxon Mobil 4. Non Governmental Organizations : Alliance to Save Energy American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) US Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) Sierra Club Union of Concerned Scientists 2. Construction Companies: Anderson Windows Lafarge Owens Corning Vulcan Materials Shaw Group US Green Building Council Fluor CH2M Hill 6.Energy Innovation in the U. Federal and State Public Sector: National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) National Association of State Energy Officers (NASEO) US Dept of Energy – Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (DOE/EE-RE) US Dept of Transportation – Research and Innovative Technology Administration. Stakeholder List 1. Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) American Association of Community Colleges Apollo Alliance International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers International Brotherhood of Boilermakers 7 . Development & Technology US Environmental Protection Agency – Office of Transportation and Air Quality (EPA/OTAQ) US Dept of Labor – Employment and Training Administration 3.S. Transportation Industry: Delphi FedEx Ford General Motors AMR (American Airlines) Visteon 7.

no new mines opened Promote natural gas vehicle technology on a large. 25% remains fossil fuels (oil/ coal) 30% Nuclear 20% Renewables Continue to promote and develop transition to natural gas Increase nuclear power capacity. electric. Retrof it 10% of commercial and industrial buildings 35.S. Begin f iv e y ear adv isory period for the fossil f uel industry to initiate transition to natural gas Halt increase of f ossil f uel subsidies and begin reallocation 100% state IECC Building Code compliance (2016).scale 30% renewables (20% wind.S. complete national storage facility One million plug-in hy brids on the road 35% net-zero buildings in U. Final Recommendations Summary Timeline By Year  Idea/ Goal Begin a f ive-y ear education plan to increase public awareness about alternativ e energy sources. renewable technologies and nuclear energy Increase nuclear power capacity.S. hy dro. 5% solar. 40% renewable. 40% nuclear 100% net-zero buildings in U. Creation of the National Commissioning Collaborativ e to ov ersee building efficiency No new coal operations can continue in former sites. electric hybrid automobile technology incorporated into the priv ate sector 75% net-zero buildings in U.Energy Innovation in the U.S. 5% geothermal) Natural gas.scale natural gas transition (incentiv ized) Use subsidy money to research and dev elop algal f uel.5 minimum MPG standard for new cars and light trucks (2016) Increase nuclear power capacity Begin large. 2010   2015       2020      2025      2030    2040 2050 8    . 15% natural gas. complete reprocessing f acilities 25% Natural Gas. as well as implement workforce training programs. 5% oil.

using natural gas as a bridge fuel. we. emphasizes renewable and nuclear energy for electricity. We created a timeline to remake our country’s energy portfolio. 9 . uses algal-based fuels and electrification for transportation. and focuses on energy efficiency in the buildings sector. Final Recommendations Introduction In this paper. We will encourage this transition with a redeployment of existing Federal subsidies in fossil fuels to renewable energy. which includes a transition from coal and oil.S. and a large focus on education and public awareness. the students.Energy Innovation in the U. present a set of recommendations for energy innovation in the United States for the next 40 years and beyond that will move the country off of its dependence on oil and coal towards a more sustainable future.

President Obama has already declared that he will reduce oil subsidies by about $2. As a result. an additional five percent will be added to the previous deduction.S. ten percent of these subsidies would be taken and redistributed. the fossil fuel subsidies will start at $10.S.8 billion and reallocating $1. pg. During the same year.2 billion to renewable energy (Estimating U. We recommend that these deductions continue. Begin reduction of subsidies f or f ossil f uels by 10 percent 15 percent 20 percent 25 percent 30 percent 35 percent 40 percent 45 percent 50 percent 55 percent End of reductions for fossil fuels 10 . we recommend reducing fossil fuel subsidies to $10. p. For every year until 2025. the annual subsidies taken from the original fossil Year Present day (June 2010) 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Plan for Year Begin f iv e-year advisory period. Therefore. assuming the fossil fuel subsidies start at approximately $12 billion in 2015. In 2017. increases in fossil fuel subsidies would be halted entirely by the year 2015. 37). there will be a 20 percent deduction and so forth until 2025.8 billion and be reduced by 15 percent. In 2016. we determined that our goals can be reached to a large extent simply by reallocating existing subsidies for fossil fuels toward more preferable energy sources. 6).Energy Innovation in the U. However. such as to pay the oil company’s income taxes. but rejected it as socially and politically infeasible. From there and after.7 billion in 2011 (Obama Budget Aims).8 billion available to be reallocated. Government Subsidies. Final Recommendations Economics: Subsidy Reform We carefully considered different mechanisms to reach our goals outlined in our introduction. Studies show that fossil fuel subsidies have no impact on the price of oil (The Effects of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform. a majority goes to nonconsumer affecting expenses. Instead. with $2. including a gasoline tax.

The incentives transferred from fossil fuels would continue to be put into their new target areas until the transition 11 . The Department of Education would be given ten percent in early years. This leaves a safety net of $0. The Livable Communities Program assists communities that “increase choices for transportation users. and enhance economic opportunities and environmental sustainability” (Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Highlights). Subsidies and Incentives). not to exceed $500 million in later years when the subsidies are largest. The Department of Transportation would receive at least 15 percent to additionally fund programs similar to the Livable Communities Program.S. provide affordable connection from residences to employment centers and other key amenities.8 billion. as well as to the Department of Education. These would be used to stimulate investment in the transportation sector to become more energy efficient and ecologically responsible. which currently receives less than $500 million in subsidies. and to be given to consumers for tax incentives (Solar Financing.Energy Innovation in the U. This money would be used to educate the public and corporations on environmental awareness and alternative sources of energy.2 billion for the fossil fuel industry during the future transition to renewables. This could be done through media announcements and informational conferences. About fi ve to ten percent would be distributed as corporate tax incentives. Companies competing in the renewable sector would be given at least 60 percent of the appropriations. Final Recommendations fuel subsidy amount of $12 billion would be $11. We recommend that the specific allocations of these subsidies remain in Congress within the jurisdiction of the House Appropriations Committee (Committee Jurisdiction). such as nuclear energy. We propose that the subsidies reduced from the fossil fuel sector should instead be divided appropriately to the renewable sector. Department of Transportation.

Final Recommendations away from fossil fuels has been completed (between 2075-2100). but to integrate it. The idea behind the reduced subsidy proposal would be to encourage the fossil fuel industry to begin diversifying their market. It would be in the best interests of fossil fuel firms to begin adding renewable branches to not only improve their public image. but to gain more income as the demand for alternative energies increases. The plan is not to eliminate this crucial division in the United States economy. Corporations are focused on making profits.Energy Innovation in the U. 12 .S.

public awareness through media campaigns. We also recommend significant investment in public workforce training programs. Public Awareness First steps in expanding renewable energy’s role in America begins with education. increase funding of research and development programs. and educate a scientifically-minded workforce from the ground up through changes in K-12 education as well as at the university level. and will cost roughly $100 million annually. wind turbines. This includes new power plants. 13 . Final Recommendations Education: Public Awareness and Workforce Training We recommend a major campaign in the education and workforce sector to promote public awareness. These include the creation of commercials and internet ads. we suggest that mandated community sessions be held. Lastly. ambassadors would educate students on methods of energy efficiency in communities and the best sources of renewable energy regionally. 1 The term used to describe opposition to new dev elopment close to or within residential areas. as well as specific training for the transition from fossil fuel to renewable and nuclear industries. such sessions would address issues such as the widespread NIMBY1 (Not-In-My-Back-Yard) syndrome and other common misconceptions. These ambassadors would come from non-governmental organizations and will host workshops at schools and community events. Ideally. Led by town leaders and based on the community's support or disdain for green energy.Energy Innovation in the U." Also. and community sessions will expedite the nation’s shift towards energy efficiency and decreased reliance on fossil fuels. (Merriam-Webster 1980). energy ambassadors. touting the benefits of a green lifestyle and simple changes the public can make to be "greener. In the first five years of this plan (2010-2015).S. transportation improv ements. these sessions will be informal and designed to cater to the average citizen and their concerns.

If nuclear energy is to play a larger role in the future. Final Recommendations K-12 Schools and Universities We recommend education changes on the K-12 level.000 new STEM teachers must be recruited and trained annually ("Rising Above the Storm").000 community and K-12 general education programs per year to educate the general public. 10. which aims to increase numbers of teachers from quality teacher preparation programs as well as improve curriculum ("Program Plan"). Engineering and Mathematics) education will promote continued energy innovation. the industry should host over 1. Specific changes include the continued creation of specialized STEM high schools and training programs for AP math and science teachers. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 insured this endeavor's start by providing funds for the Teacher Quality Enhancement Recovery Plan. An increased emphasis on STEM (Science. as we recommend. We recommend that this education program remain in place annually until at least 2050. a part of the education budget. The nuclear industry should also provide 1. Technology. then a re-education of the public on nuclear power and its true dangers and its true potential as an energy source is the key to the success of this policy. In addition. clean energy through a combination of nuclear and renewable resources. In order to accomplish this. Funding for these scholarships could be offset from the portion of subsidies the Department of Education receives annually for the advancement of sustainable energy. To increase the number of these teachers. about $50 million every year. The scholarships are meant to provide skilled workers for the nuclear industry. will be 14 .000 scholarships for nuclear engineering and other nuclear related fields through the Department of Education. Education plays a vital role in the first few years of this policy. promoting safe. The number of scholarships may be subject to change depending on the funding and the need of the industry.S.Energy Innovation in the U.

which will be responsible for providing information and dissemination. implying a significant increase in renewable energy jobs ("Obama's Energy Plan"). community colleges and vocational schools should also receive allotments to train those workers.S. beyond the $50 million mark originally proposed. Though education of the public on these options seems expensive over the short run. including nuclear energy and solar power. we recommend that new scholarship and internship programs be developed. Education and the encouragement for the expanding fields will remain crucial to the success of our energy revolution. it will more than pay itself back in reduced energy imports and potential net renewable exports for states. engineers. 15 . would be based on demand calculated by colleges and universities. and allocations should be reassessed every five years. we recommend that universities assess a new value for total “green energy” scholarships and community involvement provided. Final Recommendations allotted for clean energy scholarships. By 2030. a heightened public awareness of energy concerns and “green” jobs. To train new technicians and electricians. To address this new demand for scientists. These projects will be funded by the Department of Education. The money will be allocated according to technological progress in the respective fields. Scholarships for specific energy areas. and we believe would cost about $50 million in the next fi ve years. which make up the majority of the clean energy industry. Workforce Training President Obama outlined a plan to increase the use of renewable energy in the electric sector to 25 percent by 2025. and physicists. These programs would put students on the track for clean renewable and non-renewable energy degrees. advancing education in renewable and nuclear fields.Energy Innovation in the U. The purpose of this initiative is to update the American public about advances in renewable energy.

This is vital. the coal industry will receive $5 million and the nuclear energy sector will receive $500 million over the next fi ve years from federal stimulus money to fund this transition every year. jobs. Specifically. so there is a huge concern about potential job loss as the industry is phased out ("Industry Jobs"). Final Recommendations Implementation of measures during this period would continue on into the long term as the viability and promising output from these enactments would be in the best interest of energy innovation progress.S. extensive and wide-spread training programs will create a strong. Because of the infrastructure similarity between coal power plants and nuclear power plants. we recommend developing special transition programs for the training of workers in nuclear power plants.and community-based programs and initiatives. or about 1000 jobs ("Power Plant Operators").S.2 million U. "green-collar" workforce in renewable energy technology. Another potential partnership that would engage the social element would be a partnership with public works organizations. This action costs little money to the government. the nuclear power plants will be replacing the coal power plants. There has already been a precedent set for a government agency endorsing the work of a nonprofit or private business. The fossil fuel industry currently provides 9. we recommend Federal government recognition of state. Government Support Along with focused education campaigns. one example of a Federal-state governmental partnership committed to renewable energy is the National Association of State Energy Officials’ (NASEO) partnership with EnergyStar. To combat this. such as 16 .Energy Innovation in the U. Therefore. but does serve to get the name of the organization out into the open. as the need for nuclear plant operators from 2008 to 2018 is expected to grow 19 percent.

17 . The purpose of endorsing an organization like American Youthworks would both engage the sympathies of the public for a switch from fossil fuels to renewable power and it would expand the base of support and knowledge outside of the political and scientific Innovation in the U.S. a nonprofit which employs at-risk youth and young adults and teaches them job skills specifically for the sustainable housing and building sector (americanyouthworks. Final Recommendations American Youthworks.

This period is to be used primarily for educating individual fossil fuel corporations by means of stakeholder meetings where discussions will be held over which alternate energy sources are the most economically beneficial for each specific corporation. Final Recommendations Fossil Fuels: Transportation and Electricity Our goal is to transition the country away from heavy reliance on fossil fuels for both electricity and transportation.S. by using natural gas as a transitional fuel source until we can rely heavily on renewable technologies. we recommend the fossil fuel industry jump-start the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energies by initiating a five-year advisory period. along with the government’s business-oriented 18 . Electricity consumption by the U. Energy Inf ormation Administration Starting the Transition In the year 2015. and nuclear. to 5. solar. Projected Fuel Use by Source (quadrillion Btu) Source: U. 6). wind. is expected to grow 39 percent from 2005 to 2030.S. This will incorporate the pros and cons of investment in energy sources such as natural gas.S.8 billion mega-watt hours (“Annual Energy Outlook 2010”.Energy Innovation in the U.

Because of our recommendation to switch subsidies from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Source:The Pew Center 19 . and benefit to the public image provided by these two sources of energy. fossil fuel corporations would be more likely to invest in renewable technology because of the money available. Final Recommendations recommendation for combined investment in natural gas and renewable technologies. fossil fuel companies in the Southeast would likely most greatly benefit from renewable energy in the form of biomass (Fitzpatrick. Therefore. The corporations will be advised on which particular industry offers the greatest potential and viability in the future. For example. the opportunity for ownership of renewable technology is an incentive of its own. In contrast to renewable technology.Energy Innovation in the U. nuclear technology already has major corporations of its own. which will gradually transition fossil fuel subsidies to renewable technology. fossil fuel corporations would merely become shareholders. The information presented at the discussions could be immediately applied. as well as the opportunity to lead a field that is currently relatively small. companies will be thoroughly versed on the fossil fuel subsidy reallocation plan. Each corporation is required to attend at least one of these mediated meetings in which scientists and other experts would present information on the technologies that could eventually guarantee the corporations’ economic viability in the future while staying mindful of the environment. and by investing. transportation. and education. environmental viability.S. and companies could shift to largely invest in natural gas and renewable technology because of the profitability. Furthermore. specifically in relation to each individual corporation. Cash).

meaning that its use would entail less importation of foreign oil (“Resources” Naturalgas.06 kilojoules. Final Recommendations Shift to Natural Gas We recommend oil corporations transition their investments toward natural gas as a temporary. the fossil 2 Source: EPA. Natural gas is the cleanest of all fossil (NaturalGas. to move away from the worst of the fossil fuels without upsetting current oil-based relations. Additionally. A switch to natural gas would not cause a shift in the current international fuel-trade power structure because although the United States is the 6 th largest producer of natural gas. In order to allow for this rise in energy from alternative.S. natural gas exists in the United States in much larger quantities than oil. which are on the same path to natural gas (“Natural Gas and Technology”).000 pounds of emissions per billion Btu 2 energy The Obama-Biden comprehensive New Energy for America plan in 2009 called for a projected goal of obtaining 25 percent of our nation’s electricity from renewable sources by the year 2025. cleaner resources and to best meet the Obama-Biden British thermal unit. transitioning to natural gas in the short-term would allow the U. releasing about 117. The transition away from oil to natural gas would not run a higher risk of endangering U. especially those related to the United States’ relationship with OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries).000 pounds currently released by coal.S.S. 20 . compared to the 208. international relations with oil producing countries.Energy Innovation in the U. From an international standpoint. transitional energy source in place of their current product. it is preceded by five OPEC nations who currently possess natural gas in larger quantities. Department of Energy) unit equal to approximately 1. as well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050 (U.

(EPA Energy Trends). Department of Energy). social.56/ barrel) is cheaper than a barrel of oil ($82. Since a barrel equivalent of natural gas ($69. In order to reach the United States responsibilities in combating climate change by reducing carbon emissions by 80 percent in America. fossil fuel companies also should have decreased the combined amount of oil and coal from about 60 percent to 25 percent by 2025 (Thresher and Musial). once more CNG pumps are and economic aspects of natural gas (Thresher and Musial). the coal industry is going to be drastically cut back (America. consumers will favor the less expensive natural gas (U.S.S. Final Recommendations fuel industry should initially aim to increase their natural gas percentage from 23 percent to 25 percent via continued promotion and development of the technological.S.50/barrel).S. Energy Information Administration ). easily accessible infrastructures for electric and compressed natural gas (CNG) fuel stations. The higher demand for CNG will directly raise the production of it. with the shift towards producing natural gas. There are currently 538 electric fuel stations and 838 CNG stations in the United States (U. fossil fuel industries should begin investing in partnership with transportation industries to build new. In order to encourage consumer spending on natural gas. Meanwhile. Coal According to the Environmental Protection Agency. coal accounts for approximately 50 percent of electric power generation in the U.Energy Innovation in the U. The consumption of coal accounts for around 40 percent of the country’s CO2 emissions (Gardner). The fossil fuel corporations will have known about the upcoming changes and been 21 . We believe the American public will need to shift to a much more anti-coal mindset.

Final Recommendations encouraged to conform to the new policies since the first five-year education phase of our plan starting in 2010. by limiting the supply of coal. These changes can be extremely effective as long as these ideas are followed.S.S. which should not be complicated as long as the public is educated appropriately. which rely on oil for 98 percent of their transportation needs (America’s Energy Future. We believe that the reduction in fossil fuel dependence created by the halt of new coal operations will allow room for the renewable energy sector to expand. In addition. The backbone of Western society consists of the use of cars. planes. this cut will be fulfilled by a moratorium on new mines to be constructed or approved. trucks. Energy Information Administration).5 million barrels of oil are consumed in the United States every day (CIA – The World Factbook). boats. we will encourage the switch from coal to natural gas for electricity.Energy Innovation in the U. Natural gas is an appropriate substitute and limits the CO2 emissions of burning coal. More than 19. These changes will require the above stated infrastructure change. Beginning in 2030. The last few decades have seen a dramatic increase in energy consumption. less energy demand will fall to burning coal. 331). p. and trains to transport people and goods.S. all formerly opened mines will be able to continue being operational until they prove empty. As reallocated subsidy money is put into renewable energy technologies to compensate for the shift. These recommendations will also require the support of the coal industry to shut down new mining operations. Since 56 percent of petroleum to meet the U. Transportation The transportation industry consumes about 29 percent of the total energy usage in the United States (U.’s energy 22 .

Fossil Fuel Industry Regulation In today's industry. We propose fines be increased in order to raise the level of accountability undertaken by corporations in energy endeavors. but money is still made. before the mine disaster in the Upper Big Branch mine 3. However. nytimes. there had been 1. This has inspired many corporations and organizations to look into new sources of energy and new technologies to fuel the growing transportation industry. the costs of fixing and stopped production are less than paying the fines.Energy Innovation in the U. so the problems are ignored and the fines are paid.000 dollars a day for a 3 April. To catal yze this transformation. p. When considering the recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The remedy is to provide an incentive to make the work space safer. 211). 23 . the United States would be faced with an energy crisis should oil become a nonviable source of energy (America’s Energy Future. British Petroleum (BP) ignored its many safety violations for the simple reason that it was more profitable at the time to be unsafe than safe (“Despite Finding 200 Violations”).300 recorded safety violations (Roddy & Vi vian). 2010 an explosion on the Upper Big Branch Mine killed 29 people (Urbina. it seems to be an acceptable truth that there will be safety violations that will be followed by fines.S. In addition. For example. the threat of global warming has acted as a driver in promoting research of cleaner transportation fuels and technologies. Final Recommendations demands is we recommend enactment of new policies that are developed from governmental and industrial cooperation. The current system for oil companies is that they can be fined a max of $35.

The issue of raising the miles-per-gallon standard is difficult.S. The funding from the subsidies and the plug-in charging stations should increase consumer demand and pave the way for clean public and private sectors.Energy Innovation in the U. even if it may help them in the end. After 2016. we hope to encourage increasingly efficient vehicles. as well as the cost of evaluation of the safety violations. A similar idea for a system that could go across all industries would seem to be necessary. Further. especially in the fields of natural gas. Over the short-term. companies will have difficulty paying for truck gas. while also emitting lower numbers of toxic pollutants and particulate matter (Gable). In order to counter this economic and ecologic hazard.5 miles per gallon by 2016 for all new cars and light trucks (Voorhees). Compressed natural gas is also measured in gallons equivalent to that of gasoline (Gable). But in addition to the basic standard of $35. we decided to use the standard that President Obama set at 35. Natural gas costs 40 percent less than gasoline and has an 80 percent reduction in emissions (Compressed Natural Gas). which will significantly decrease our carbon dioxide emissions. we recommend that truckers switch to natural gas as a fuel. as oil becomes scarce and gets more expensive. Final Recommendations single violation until it is fixed (Wang).000 dollars a day. Year 2040 will also bring in a new wave of automobile technology in the private sector. so industry will raise their fuel efficiency as necessary as people demand better gas mileage. electric and electric-hybrid (plug-in hybrid). A natural gas vehicle currently reduces CO2 emissions by 25 percent. By 2025 we hope to see at least one million plug-in hybrids on the road.1 times the cost of repairing the issue be included. 24 . no company wants to be forced to do something. we recommend that 1. Vehicles Our group considered the issue of raising fuel efficiency standards.

Energy Innovation in the U. They currently produce 67 percent fewer greenhouse gases than gasoline cars do. (X Prize Foundation. and by the year 2040 we recommend these technologies be incorporated into the private sector. These technologies lower oil imports. planes. there are no tailpipe emissions and these cars are 99 percent cleaner than conventional vehicles. with an established infrastructure behind them. The challenge would be open to 4 A $10 million plus grand prize given to the first team to achieve a goal set forth by the X Prize Foundation.S. the E Prize would be a competition to judge the most innovative technological design for public transportation. capable of cutting emissions by 70 percent (Union of Concerned Scientists). buses. PHEVs can also potentially run on bio-diesel. greenhouse gases and pollution in the long run. Due to the use of electricity. Final Recommendations Plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEV) are powered by both gasoline engines and electrical sources and offer innovations like regenerative braking and electric motor drive (CalCars). ethanol and other bio-fuels (CalCars). 2010). CO2 Emissions Finally. The goal is to “benefit humanity” in a new. an electric vehicle currently uses the electricity stored in a battery to power an electric motor. Modeled after an X prize 4 . while continually getting cleaner as time progresses due to the revolutions of the electric grid (CalCars). 25 . Public Transportation We recommend that a boost is given to further enhance the development of public transportation: an E Prize. which includes boats. and trains. innovative way.

26 . and Virgin Airlines are currently conducting trials with algal fuel (Bisignani).5 billion. Recent rises in jet fuel prices have resulted in extreme stress on airline companies to find a dependable alternative fuel to power their jets. and the costs to construct and maintain. Final Recommendations individuals. and companies with a reward of one to five million dollars provided from the redistributed subsidy funds. Its goal is for all members is to use a minimum of ten percent alternative fuels in flight by 2017 (IATA). organizations. Se veral companies. In 2020. The price of research. a prize would not be awarded. and deployment of algal fuels in jets. The competition would be judged by a panel of professional environmentalists. Continental Airlines. such as Air New Zealand. This has raised interest in algal jet fuel research.Energy Innovation in the U. the energy efficiency. which allows ample room for algal fuel investment (Snathanam). development. the amount of subsidies not transferred to renewable energy would average out to $2. which was briefly studied in the 1990s. the simplicity to integrate into current traffic systems. However. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) promotes research. The criteria for judging would be the ecological benefits.S. and engineers paid with the help of the registration fee. economists. and start-up of algal fuels as an alternative fuel for flight could be paid for through the use of the remaining fossil fuel subsidies. development. if none of the submissions are adequate. Alternative Fuels for Aviation One area of concern during the transition away from oil is aviation because of the current lack of a viable alternative.

we recommend by 2050 to generate 45 percent of the country’s energy demands using nuclear power. Final Recommendations Nuclear Power: New Technology and Increased Production Nuclear power is an emission-free form of energy formed by the splitting of atoms in a nuclear reactor. the public and the environment (Nuclear Energy Institute).000 worker hours (“Nuclear Industry Safety”).S. Nuclear power supplies approximately 20 percent of the country’s current energy demand and is responsible for a 20 percent reduction in electric utility emissions of greenhouse gasses (Lipper and Stone). together with high levels of operational performance. Given these facts. 27 . The nation’s nuclear power plants are among the safest and most secure industrial facilities in the United States with 0.Energy Innovation in the U. Nuclear power plants have the lowest production cost of electricity.03 cents per kilowatt-hour including the costs of operating and maintaining the plant. protect plant workers. Currently there are 104 nuclear power reactors in the United States with 35 planned new reactors.13 accidents per 200. Multiple layers of physical security. Splitting just one atom produces ten million times the energy of the combustion a carbon atom in coal would produce (World Nuclear). The average production cost of nuclear generated electricity from existing plants is 2. purchasing fuel and paying for the management of used fuel (Nuclear Energy Institute).

we recommend an increase of 50 percent over 2015 levels by 2050. Research We recommend that during the next fifteen years. in addition to the nuclear waste accepted from around the world. we propose that all 104 of the reactors in the United States be updated or refurbished to newer generation reactors along with the production of 106 new and more advanced reactors. Funding for these projects can be provided through industry and private investment. The plan includes the building of a national waste storage facility for the remaining nuclear wastes generated in the U. Of the $2. as well as 50 fast breeder reactors and the corresponding infrastructure for waste reprocessing. which includes expanded research on current nuclear technologies as well as the creation of strategies for the disposal of nuclear wastes. as outlined by the President's 2011 National Budget plan ("FY-11 Budget"). Similarly. These research funds will continue to go towards the promotion of nuclear and non-renewable energy.and long-term future. we recommend that $1.3 billion from the Department of Energy. We 28 .S.3 billion total.5 billion should be allocated towards nuclear energy research. Specifically. Furthermore. We recommend a similar trend of increased research funding be seen in the mid. but will fluctuate with need. The remaining $800 million can fund research for non-renewable energy sources and basic energy-efficiency measures. Final Recommendations We also recommend a goal to have a production capacity of up to 50 percent to account for fluctuations from renewable energy sources. we hope to see a 25 percent increase in research funding over 2015 levels by 2025. bank loans. In order to achieve this goal. and government subsidies.S.Energy Innovation in the U. we suggest that the construction of new nuclear facilities take place near already existing nuclear infrastructure to avoid unnecessary transportation and lower security costs. This can be accomplished by an annual research allotment of $2. as well as theft risks. funding for research and development of renewable and non-renewable energy sources increase.

We also recommend building ten advanced fast reactors 6 that will use reprocessed nuclear waste along with the appropriate supporting infrastructure such as fuel reprocessing sites. Each fastbreeder reactor will generate approximately 1.000 homes (Nuclear Energy Institute).9 billion per plant. Final Recommendations expect a gradual decrease in the proportion of funds to nuclear energy and thus a gradual increase in the proportion of funds for other renewable energies.Energy Innovation in the U.2 5 6 Fast Breeder Reactor Diagram. In addition to the updated reactors. and about 800 permanent jobs for the operation of each Decommissioning is the act of saf ely remov ing the nuclear reactor from service and reducing residual radioactivity in the area ( USNRC). Timeline for Increased Nuclear Power Generation 2015 We suggest that by the year 2015 all thirteen reactors currently in the decommissioning process 5 be upgraded to newer generation reactors (National Regulatory Commission). Fast-breeder reactors: reactors that produce more plutonium than they consume (World Nuclear Association) 29 .5 gigawatts of electricity (GWe). At an average cost of $1. Source:reachingcriticalwill. Each construction site will create 3. this will increase the production of each of these reactors by about 25 percent or enough energy to power a minimum of 800. Every new plant can generate approximately 1. we recommend construction of twelve newer generation reactors at an estimated cost of $6 to $10 billion each. this number will increase as the technology is improved over time (World Nuclear Association).500 jobs for a three to five year period while the plant is being constructed.S.

Final Recommendations Source: USNRC GWe. Intensive government funded research will be an ongoing process to find new ways to recycle and eliminate radioactive waste produced by the nuclear power plants. To accommodate waste. again this number is subject to change as technology is improved over time (International Panel on Fissile Materials).S. Also in the works should be a fission-fusion hybrid reactor that will be used to initiate research programs aiming to increase nuclear efficiency. An additional thirty older generation reactors should be upgraded to newer 30 .Energy Innovation in the U. depending on the technological advancement.S. 2020 We suggest that an additional twelve newer generation reactors be constructed. These hybrid reactors. Nuclear Reactors in the U. we recommend a site be selected for the location of a national nuclear waste storage facility as well as the construction of reprocessing infrastructure to produce fuel for fast-breeder reactors. in addition to four more fission-fusion hybrid research reactors. can either be used to continue and increase the amount of research being done or will be able to be used commercially in the future.

Reprocessing facilities should be fully operational at this time. An additional thirty old reactors should have been updated and twenty newer generation reactors will have been constructed. All reactors constructed will bear in mind all appropriate measures and infrastructure for the maintenance. Additionally. At this time nuclear generated electricity will be producing enough energy to account for approximately 30 percent of the nation’s energy needs. 2050 We recommend that by the year 2050 an additional twenty-five newer generation reactors will have been completed creating a total of 210 reactors and fifty fast breeder reactors in the United States. reuse and disposal of nuclear waste. Fast breeder reactors should be using reprocessed fuel and nuclear waste management research funded by the Department of Energy should prove beneficial at this time.Energy Innovation in the U. nuclear energy should continue to expand its production capabilities. we suggest all remaining older generation reactors in the United States be upgraded to newer generation reactors. 2030 In 2030. Final Recommendations generation reactors. 31 . We recommend construction of a national storage site for nuclear wastes by this date and will be ready to begin accepting nuclear materials.S. By this time between forty and fifty percent of the electricity in the United States will be provided by nuclear energy. An additional twelve newer generation reactors would be constructed along with thirty additional fast-breeder reactors. 2025 By 2025 we recommend that thirty more reactors should have been upgraded to the newer generation reactors. 2040 Twenty-fi ve additional newer generation reactors and ten fast-breeder reactors should be constructed.

Energy Innovation in the U. from 13 to 14 percent (International Energy Agency). In a study conducted by the International Energy Agency. under a “Business As Usual” scenario. the share of renewable sources in the worldwide energy consumption will only increase by one percent until 2030. In recent years. showing the potential held by renewable energy to eventually take o ver a large portion of the electricity sector (Energy Information Administration). From a technical standpoint. and the world to an economy based on renewable energy. renewable energy provided 10. innovation and ingenuity give us the ability to constantly increase the efficiency of renewable energy. our goal is to ultimately transition the country. 132). During the first ten months of 2009. dramatic improvements in the performance and affordability of solar cells. Final Recommendations Renewable Energy: Implementation and Storage A competitive and diversified energy portfolio is vital to the development of domestic industry and employment as well as national economic health. current energy policies cannot remain stagnant. electricity. 87).S.5 percent of U.S. many in the 20-50 percent range. Despite current Source: Energy Inf ormation Administration 32 . Despite this promising statistic. easily overtaking the current energy demand if harvested to their full potential (Sawin. Through reallocating funding sources and providing incentives for developing renewable technologies. Most renewable technologies are experiencing annual growth rates in the double digits. wind turbines and biofuels have paved the way for mass commercialization (Kammen. Creating Green Communities We recommend that the Department of Energy set aside $1. renewable energy is the cleanest and most sustainable form of energy and is ideal for our electricity-based global society.9 billion of their $13 billion annual loan budget to support low-interest loans (at an interest rate of approximately 2. “Business as Usual” Source: knowledge.S. even before more massive action is implemented.allianz. By the year 2050. Final Recommendations limitations. Initiatives such as these would empower citizens in the business sector to create their own sustainable projects.5 percent) for community projects designed to ‘green’ their communities. 33 .Energy Innovation in the U. we propose that the renewable energy sector account for 40 percent of energy consumption in the U.

25). fiberglass and other raw materials will increase. Indeed. although demand for copper. 20% Wind) We recommend this target. 20 percent wind can be reliably integrated into the grid for less than 0.S. translating to roughly about $0. Costs of integrating intermittent wind power into the grid are modest. solar and geothermal. For one-fifth of the nation’s electricity to be provided by wind.5 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) (DOE. several sectors of renewable energy must be expanded. 20% Wind). wind power could account for 20 percent of energy consumption by 2030. including wind. It will serve to advance renewable technology by e xpanding the convenience for the consumer.000 square miles in the American Southwest. through utilizing 30. 20% Wind. about 300 gigawatts (GW) would have to be generated by wind. p. achieving 20 percent wind will require the number of annual turbine installations to increase from approximately 2000 in 2006 to almost 7000 in 2017. No material constraints currently exist. The Departments of Energy and Transportation could make a collaborative effort on this beginning infrastructure. Clearly. (DOE.Energy Innovation in the U. Private companies that helped create this system with the government could be offered tax credits. Estimates for the direct cost to society is about $43 billion. This scenario is based on a number of primary assumptions. which would require annual installations to increase more than threefold. We also recommend a major effort in the short-term for renewable energy -. Wind Power To accomplish the goal we have set for renewable energy. Final Recommendations There are many projects and initiatives like the ones above that are relatively low cost and spread support for renewable energy in a manner that is almost viral. achieving 20 percent wind is not limited 34 .setting up a pilot program of charging stations in an area that is dense in electric cars.50 monthly per consumer (DOE. namely wind turbine energy production increasing by 15 percent and wind turbine costs decreasing by about ten percent. Studies have shown that with sufficient funding.

the transmission and distribution of the energy will be a challenge. Through this plan. and a total of $440 billion contribution to the US economy. p. 20% Wind.000 direct jobs and 500. 34) Job Estimates created by increasing wind power generation: Source: DOE 20% Wind 35 .000 total jobs created.S. According to our plan. Issues related to siting and cost allocation of new transmission lines to access the nation’s best wind resources will need to be resolved. final benefits would result in 150. an estimated 825 million tons of carbon emissions will be reduced annually (DOE. Despite the fact that raw materials are available.Energy Innovation in the U. Final Recommendations by the a vailability of raw materials. as depicted below.

Zweibel describes in one particular study.000 square miles of photovoltaic arrays would be erected to provide almost 3.000 GW of power (Zweibel. 30. 64). Final Recommendations Solar Power The capability of solar power is enormous. only 2. but would require substantial investments in research and the development of a radically different infrastructure. alone.S.8 Photovoltaic systems in particular show the potential for strong growth over the next century. 66).5 percent of the solar radiation received by 250.7 The IEA also expects photovoltaic technology fitted on residential and commercial buildings to reach “grid parity” by 2020.S.Energy Innovation in the U. producing steam that turns a turbine. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has reported that solar photovoltaic and concentrated solar power together could account for about 22 percent of global electricity production by 2050. metallic mirrors to f ocus sunlight onto a fluid-f illed pipe. 67).000 square miles in the American Southwest is necessary to match the country’s total energy consumption in 2006 (Zweibel. A high-voltage direct-current transmission system would be used to send electricity to the 7 36 Producing concentrated solar power requires long. 34). Concentrated solar power would supply one fifth of the solar energy. 8 Grid Parity : consistent cost-competitiveness with conventional f ossil f uels and nuclear power (International Energy Agency ). solar energy could power 69 percent of the electricity demand by 2050 and 35 percent of its total energy. albeit with time and constant funding. . heating it and then running the f luid through a heat exchanger. Compressed-air energy storage would be used to maintain excess power for dark hours. Energy from the sun is “virtually unlimited. In this plan. In the U.” says the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems which declares that the ratio of the sunshine on the solid part of the earth to the total power needs of the humans on Earth in 2020 is 6:1 (Johnson. Sixteen hours of storage would be needed for electricity to be generated f or 24 hours (Zweibel.

What makes this grid "smart" is the ability to ). an exorbitant amount of money is required to fulfill the solar grand plan within such a narrow time period. 9 “The Smart Grid is an automated electric power system that monitors and controls grid activities. 37 . ensuring the twoway flow of electricity and information between power plants and consumers—and all points in between. and. which. at 2050. solar power would receive enough money from the redistribution of subsidies to easily supplement the existing renewable energy by 2030. Final Recommendations storage facilities throughout the country.Energy Innovation in the U. $420 billion is needed to completely over-haul the nation’s energy infrastructure. However. in some cases. monitor. While this seems like an excellent solution.” (Smartgrid.S. installing a SmartGrid-reminiscent system suited for solar energy9. encompass 535 billion cubic ft of storage (p. if the plan were adjusted to fit with the timeline we have created. control (automatically or remotely) how the system operates or behav es under a given set of conditions. 68).

hydroelectric power is responsible for about six percent of U. if not more (Mims).S. more than it already is.3. As newer and Source: Green. but over the next fifty to one hundred years. Due to the controversial nature of hydroelectric power and the adverse ecological impact of dams.S. electricity. Currently. hydroelectric power will be slowly phased out of the electricity and energy sectors. renewable energy and water. By 2030. new technologies will be created and improved. Another point of contention concerns the impending water crisis.Energy Innovation in the U. p.S. electricity. Final Recommendations Geothermal and Hydroelectric Power As further research is completed in the area of renewable energy. Geothermal accounts for a large portion of the renewable energy base of the United States. p. 11). that number will decrease ("Electric 2008". geothermal power is expected to become a major power player in the energy industry. We believe the American public should not have to choose between clean. 38 . geothermal power is expected to provide five percent of the U. safer methods of drilling are developed.

p. 39 .8 billion fund. are a large-scale “energy island” offshore energy storage system. We suggest that the $7 billion generated from the diminished fossil fuel subsidies will also be used to research energy storage and transmission capabilities. splitting water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. this will mean a subsidy of $600 million in 2015. Isentropic. The issue of energy storage after peak hours for sunlight could also come in the form of solar-powered electrolyzers.S. Final Recommendations Renewable Energy Storage and Transmission Following the five year period dedicated to education (2010-2015). a high temperature superconducting f ault current limiter. These batteries were used in a hydroelectric setting. pressurized air storage and electrochemical storage in f uel cells will contribute to the enhancement of the sy stem (EREC. In the realm of innovative ways to ease the transition to renewable energy and to diminish the intermittency of sustainable energy. starting that year. Excess daytime electricity from solar panels can power the electrolyzer and the gases could then be recombined in a fuel cell to yield electricity. our subsidy reallocation plan dictates that renewable energy technology will begin to receive at least 60 percent of a redistributed fossil fuel subsidies. past the conv entional method pumped storage. gravel batteries have been shown by an independent UK technology firm. Isentropic claims the round-trip energy efficiency of up to eighty percent and the cost of a system per kilowatt-hour of storage to be between $10 and $55 (Isentropic). a small-scale electricity storage system and flexible storage for distributed generation. In the electricity sector. 50). 10 10 Electrolyzer Some additional energy storage technologies currently being researched. Initially. This amount will increase steadily until 2025 when renewable energy will receive roughly $7 billion annually out of the $11. testing advanced storage technologies f or ancillary serv ices. a compact high-temperature superconductor hydropower generator. to be useful in energy storage. p. with the only by-product being water (Johnson.Energy Innovation in the U. an adv anced high temperature superconducting magnetic energy storage (SMES) system. 8).

40 . Final Recommendations In response to transmission and distribution concerns. These investments. we recommend that money be funneled towards the research of high-temperature superconducting (HTS) cables.Energy Innovation in the U. in addition to an innovative distribution system will make large movements towards a renewable society. Public resistance to the installation of new power lines is growing. HTS cables can carry three to five times more current than conventional power lines can. and establish long-term storage systems. while maintaining the diameter of the conventional lines (American Superconductor).com By 2050.S. an HTS cable is also more environmentally friendly. energy consumption. even as the need for more lines increases. Its integration into a portion of the National Grid electric transmission system in Albany. The money spent on renewable energy will be used to develop these technologies. our renewable energy technology and production capabilities should reach a level that they can account for 40 percent of all U.S. Composed of a ceramic-based superconducting wire with little electrical impedance and virtually no resistive heat losses. HTS Cable Source: physicsw orld. New York and across New England states shows promise for applications countrywide (Moscovic).

maintenance and demolition” (U. operation. and industrial structures. renovation. the building sector. Industrial and Residential Buildings In 2008.Energy Innovation in the U. the United States Department of Energy (DOE) implemented the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC).    Green building To encourage more green building practices. Buildings also require heavy consumption of natural resources. According to the United States Green Building Council (USGBC). including:    40 % of raw material use 30 % of waste output 14 % of total water consumption (USGBC).S.S. green buildings in comparison with average buildings have: 26 % less energy needs 13 % lower maintenance costs 33% fewer greenhouse gas emissions (USGBC). Final Recommendations Energy Efficiency: Commercial. The building sector has a vast impact on the environment. EPA “Green Building”). but can also be achieved through the process of green building. including residential. Green building is “the practice of creating and using healthier and more resourceefficient models of construction. These codes are guidelines that apply to new buildings to guarantee that newly built 41 . Increasing the efficiency of buildings will not only have profoundly beneficial effects on the environment. commercial. consumed over 70 percent of total electricity alone (Energy Information Administration). accounting for 38 percent of greenhouse gas emissions – larger than any other sector.

businesses take out a loan. net-zero by 2050. For example. some states are still not meeting these building codes. but are not implemented by every state. Even with this bare minimum. Currently. The baseline standard for building’s energy efficiency is the American Society of Heating. and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 90. our goal is to collectively make every building in the U. Through enforcing regulations and promoting green building techniques. the National Association of Energy Service Companies (NAESCO) funds 70 percent of their building projects using performance contracting (ICF International). we suggest that the government use performance contracting.S. these codes are encouraged. which government and other organizations already use for building renovation projects. Final Recommendations structures are energy efficient. Green Building Government Funding and Loans To avoid the excessive government spending that would normally be incurred by this sort of project. but nevertheless are voluntary.S. Refrigerating. which is then paid back over a period 42 .Energy Innovation in the U.1 Standard (DOE Building Energy Codes). Using this method.

000 per project with an interest rate of 2.S. Final Recommendations of 2 – 20 years using the savings gained from the installation of the energy efficient technology ("Missouri Energy $mart Schools. Of the 40 percent that will go to the states. we recommend the government give out three year loans between $10.5 percent (“Retro. This presents a cost effective way for the buyers to purchase and install these systems onto their buildings and also generates a small amount of revenue for the federal and state governments from payments on the 2.Energy Innovation in the U. we recommended that states distribute the funds to electric utilities. $57 million in profit will go to the federal government every three years. By 2025.5 percent interest charge." ICF International).000 to $50. we propose that 33 percent of the potentially commissionable industrial and commercial buildings should be outfitted. The federal government will then distribute the profit. 30 percent will go toward the federal budget. The money received from this loan system would also be used to purchase renewable energy systems. In this particular case.commissioning” NEMI). 40 percent will go to the states (40 percent of the profit made from each state). to meet some of the building’s energy needs. and 30 percent will go toward tax credits for non-profits that support green housing education such as Habitat for Humanity and Casa Verde. subsidies for energy 43 . low-income housing projects and research grants to further encourage energy efficiency. a conservative minimum of $190 million profit will be allocated to the fifty states based on the amount of buildings that take the loans to fund education. A state will receive this federal money only after it can officially document how it plans to spend the money in its budget. Conservative estimates show that if the quota is met. as well as the Alliance to Save Energy. such as solar panels or wind turbines.

From this year forward.11 The 16 states that are not predicted to be able to meet the IECC 2009 11 44 Some recommendations for states set to meet the 2009 IECC standards by 2016 – South and North Dakota. Wy oming and Texas: These states (with the exception of Wy oming) are large agricultural centers and have strong potential wind energy (“Agriculture receipts: Total”. public education for building commissioners and the renewable energy workforce. The a vailability of alternative energy due to these loans will advance the use of technologies like solar panels. as the loans make it viable for the residential and commercial sectors to utilize them without having a lot of financial risk. Commercial and Industrial Buildings Based on the Department of Energy’s Save Energy Now program. Initially. This would make citizens and developers more willing to build new buildings in compliance with the IECC standards of 2003.000 per windmill (for the land required for one turbine) per year (Wind Power's Cash Crop). Eventually the revenue collected by these loans would allow for funding into other sectors such as education and research into alternative energy. which would allow these states to begin their required accelerated efficiency programs by 2015. “Wind Maps and Wind Resource Potential Estimates”). In the residential sector. creating a pool of funds to allow continual support for the program. This entire procedure could create new jobs amounting in the thousands including building commissioners.Energy Innovation in the U. (DOE “Save Energy Now”). the government needs to have converted 10 percent of all existing commercial and industrial buildings to be at least 25 percent more energy efficient. we recommend the federal government give loans to each state. and grants for both on-grid and off-grid renewable energy systems. .000 to $5. renewable energy startup employees. These states would then distribute this fund to support the alternative energies and would receive some revenue that would be redistributed again. Final Recommendations efficiency technologies for buildings. Wind energy companies would rent out a portion of agricultural land (determined by the land owner and the company) for $3. the federal government should be required to assist in the renovation of 10% of the remaining commercial and industrial buildings in each state every 3 years.S. This can be used to help said states meet the 2003 IECC standards that will be the national minimum in 2015. Residential. by 2015. we recommend the 34 states that have the ability to reach the IECC 2009 residential building standard will be required to meet that standard by 2015. and energy efficiency technology development and distribution. all cost-neutral if not cost-positive to the government.

40 percent compliance in 2013. Implementing practices such as those piloted by the CCC.S. 60 percent compliance in 2014. all 50 states will be on the same minimum IECC standard. installed.12 The CCC is a nonprofit public corporation that advocates for and makes commissioning towards energy efficient buildings possible. a National Commissioning Collaborative will allow for the government to observe the progress of the nation with respect to energy efficiency in 12 Building co mmissioning is the process of ensuring that systems are designed. functionally tested and capable of being operated and maintained according to the owner's operational needs.Energy Innovation in the U. and we recommend they also comply with the Green Points Program currently utilized in Colorado. This organization makes training and education accessible so that California may reach its goals in energy efficiency. New commercial buildings must increase efficiency standards by 30 percent. Commissioning is performed in new construction projects and in major capital improvements or retrof its (California Commissioning Collaborative). Final Recommendations standard by 2012 should be required to develop accelerated programs that will get these states to 20 percent compliance with the IECC 2009 standard by 2012. until they have reached 100 percent compliance with the IECC 2009 standard in 2016. This program states that new residential buildings must be 30-75 percent more efficient than the 2006 IECC levels. Eventually. and so on. 45 . The National Commissioning Collaborative To further advance and push for energy efficiency in buildings. we recommend creating a National Commissioning Collaborative by 2025. Through their efforts they have worked to spread knowledge about commissioning and make it a standardized process. and have a Home Energy Rating System of 15-50 percent more efficient that IECC. which follows the Department of Energy’s strategy for building commissioning. (Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency). based off of the California Commissioning Collaborative (CCC).

Buildings will undergo a standardized commissioning process that will evaluate the efficiency of the building and create a database upon which more information can be compiled. such as Illinois. as defined by off-site net zero energy consumption (National 46 . incentivizing purchases dramatically (“Special Assessment for Solar Energy” DSIRE). they are investing in America’s burgeoning renewable energy industry and taking another step toward sustainability. If buildings are self-sustainable or at least can provide for the majority of their energy needs. Final Recommendations buildings. each state must develop a standardized code for property tax incentives regarding renewable energy systems with a minimum baseline of dropping normal property ta xes of renewable energy systems by 50 percent. Energy Credit Systems By continuing efforts enacted in the short term as well as implementing new measures in this range of 2025 onward. including particular areas that are doing well and areas where building efficiency is poor. Tax Incentives We feel that a great deal must be done to encourage on site energy production in buildings. we believe it is a feasible goal for the entire nation to be at 35 percent net-zero energy in existing buildings by 2025. Such an organization would stress the importance of energy efficiency of buildings as well as create thousands of jobs throughout the nation for the commissioning process.S.Energy Innovation in the U. Se veral states. We recommend that by 2025. have adopted a policy that will not tax more for solar energy systems than conventional energy systems on property taxes. Net-zero means that these buildings would produce as much energy as they consumed. or receive this energy from renewable sources.

and the rest of the state quota either through renewable energy generation systems or by buying renewable energy credits traded on a state-wide exchange. In order to enforce these measures. as a result of the continued conversion of utility companies to alternative energy sources such as nuclear and renewable energy. all investor-owned or retail utilities will be required to meet 50 percent of a state-mandated renewable energy quota through utility owned renewable energy generation systems. the utilities do not necessarily have to produce the renewable energy themselves but can take advantage of the renewable energy credit system. As buildings continue to become more efficient.S. Given some leniency. and that is compliant with standards set at the discretion of each state. 47 . Final Recommendations Renewable Energy Laboratory).Energy Innovation in the U. all 50 states must consider implementation of a renewable energy credit system similar to Illinois’ renewable energy credit system (“Renewable Portfolio Standard” DSIRE). all buildings in the United States will be collectively net-zero. In this program. we recommend that utility companies should be able to run 75 percent of all buildings as net-zero nationwide by 2040. There is a risk of this program failing unless there is buy-in from fossil fuel-run utilities. This standard can create an incentive for commercial buildings to invest in renewable energy technologies for their building with short pay-back times. By 2050.

With the incorporation of natural gas and hybrid-electric vehicles into the existing infrastructure. will account for 40 percent of our energy portfolio. We have effectivel y educated the public. Another part of our final goal is to devote five percent of our energy portfolio to oil. By the year 2075 we believe algal fuels will be completely researched and implemented so that we may replace the five percent oil sources with algal fuel sources. we will have significantly decreased our energy consumption due to the goal of 100 percent collectively net-zero buildings in the U. clean sources Energy Goals 2050 Natural gas 15% Nuclear 40% Oil 5% Renew able 40% 48 . Renewable energy sources.Energy Innovation in the U. we will replace the 20 percent fossil fuel sector that is comprised of natural gas and oil with renewables between 2080 and 2100.S. we will have effectivel y remodeled our nation’s energy portfolio into a more sustainable and reliable one. effectively eliminating fossil fuels and replacing it with sustainable.S. of the benefits of converting to renewable energy. In addition. by this time. electricity demand. especially geothermal and solar. Final Recommendations Conclusion: Looking and nuclear power will conceivably account for the remaining 40 percent of U. 2050 and Beyond By the year 2050. In addition to shifting the focus from non-renewable to more sustainable energy sources. We have practically reduced the fossil fuel dependence from 75 percent to 20 percent (Greentechmedia. as well as fossil fuel companies. Beyond 2050. we have placed other goals to secure the continued reliability and sustainability of our nation’s energy. Fifteen percent of our energy will be derived from natural gas.S. will continue to lesson our dependence on foreign oil.

S. reliable. Again. In the near future a majority of the hot nuclear waste could be used as an energy source. 49 . photovoltaic power and geothermal sources will account for the impending transition. Eventually. our recommendations created a system that will help our country have a more sustainable. In conclusion. As more policies are implemented supporting the expansion of the renewable industry. more and more nuclear waste from other nations will be transported to the U. Final Recommendations of fuel.S. producing about 60 percent of American electricity. production will respond likewise. the current energy transmission and distribution system should be able to transition to a Smart Grid.S. enabling fast breeder reactors to reuse nuclear waste from not only the U. The growth of solar as a promising source of energy is primarily policy-driven. and healthy source of energy in the future. for reprocessing. utilizing distributed generation to relieve intermittency.Energy Innovation in the U. If current U.S. An example would be the use of excess heat to boil water or even potentially using the fusion-fission hybrid nuclear waste to split water molecules to produce hydrogen gas for use in fuel cells (NYSERDA). After another thirty years. policy trends endure. renewable energy should be able to comfortably replace the remaining natural gas sector. with roughly $200 billion from the fossil fuel subsidies. but also from other nations to generate electricity. Available online <http://www. Energy Information Administration: Independent Statistics and Analysis.html>. 18 June 2010. Thomas. et. Butler. Final Recommendations Bibliography 20% Wind Energy by 2030. Department of Energy.aspx Black & Veatch. "Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) as a Transportation Fuel. Web. <http://www.S. Web. IATA.iata. Web. "Environment. 15 June 2010 <http://www. Ma y 2008. American Superconductor.cacx. and Surveys.pdf >. 2009." Clean 9 Jan.The World Factbook. Energy Information Administration. Web. 2010.Information for the Consumer about Saving Energy from the California Energy Commission. "COMMITTEE JURISDICTION. 21 June 2010. Department of Energy.C. 15 June 2010. International Panel on Fissile Materials. Web.php?page=storage American Youthworks." Welcome to the CIA Web Site — Central Intelligence Agency. <http://rainforests. Union of Concerned Scientists. <http://www. 18 June 2010. Cochran.: National Academies.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=96&Itemid=33>. 2006. Print. 2010.html>. 18 June 2010. Washington. “Superconductor Power Cables”. Print. <http://appropriations. House of Representatives: Committee on consump.mongabay. Web.html>. Web. Feb 2010. Web. G. Rhett A.” hybrid_fuelcell_and_electric_vehicles/battery-electric-vehicles.doe." Consumer Energy Center .html> "CIA . al. <https://www.isentropic.a Sustainable Energy Resource. CA: 2007. 18 June 2010. "Ad vanced Nuclear Power Reactors | Generation III Nuclear Reactors.” Walnut Creek.20percentwind.html>.gov/afdc/fuels/ stations_counts. Bisignani. “20% Wind Energy Penetration in the United States: A Technical Analysis of the Energy Resource. Web. “Alternative Fueling Station Total Counts by State and Fuel Type.consumerenergycenter. Web.html>.org/ 50 . Web.doe. California Commissioning Collaborative.” index. http://www. America's Energy Future: Technology and Transformation. <http://www. 18 June 2010." U. Reports. 18 June “Casa Verde Builders”.org/green-jobs-programs/casa-verde-builders "Annual Energy Review." http:// www. 20 June>.S.afdc. < 18 Jun 2010. <http://www. U. “Coal Data. Web. 2 June 2010." World Nuclear Association | Nuclear Power . Web.ucsusa." U. 16 June 2010 <http://www.ipfmlibrary.Energy Innovation in the U." International Air Transport Association. "Fast Breeder Reactor Programs:. <http://www. D. 18 June 2010." International Panel on Fissile Materials. 16 June 2010. Print.htm>. "Carbon Dioxide Emissions Charts. "Battery-Electric Vehicles.

<http://www. “Fiscal Year 2011 Budget "Natural Gas Vehicles . 15 June 2010 <http://www.renewableenergyworld. Cash. < www. February 2005.” US Department of Energy: Energy Information Administration.Alternative Fuel and Hybrid Vehicles. <http://alternativefuels. Gable. 16 June 2010. Web. <http://www. Web. Department of>.” National Renewable Energy Laboratory.” U.S.” U. “Electric Power Monthly. Greentech. November 2006. 21 June 2010.html>. Print. 51 . January 2010. 18 June 2010. 2008. “Power System Modeling of 20% Wind." Web. 20 June 2010. 20 June 2010.” National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Department of>. “Coal likely to boost U.eia. “Fossil Fuel Subsidies More Than Double Those for Renewables. Web.reuters.doe.elistore. D.Compressed Natural Gas Cars and Trucks CNG Vehicles.Overview. "Despite Finding 200 Violations in Gulf Drilling Operations over the past Five Years. MMS Collected Only 16 Fines. 2007 carbon emissions. Web.pdf>." Environmental Law Institute. 18 June 2010. 16 June 2010 <http:// www.whitehouse. 17 June 2010 <http://www. <www. May>. Sept.html>. B. "greentechmedia. 2011. CF-70. Web. Hand et al. « Climate Progress. Fitzpatrick. Final Recommendations transportation/afvs/ idUSN13433185 Green.Energy Innovation in the U. "FY 2011 President's Budget . http://www.cfo. G." Hybrid Vehicles . and R. 21 May 2010. <http://climateprogress. 13 June 2010.about. “Emission Facts: Average Carbon Dioxide Emissions Resulting from Gasoline and Diesel Fuel.eia.Generated Electricity b y 2030.fas." The White products/d19_07. Scott.doe." Climate Progress. “Geothermal-The Energy Under Our Feet: Geothermal Resource Estimates for the United Fuels . <www. Environmental Protection Agency. <http://www. 15 June 2010 <http://>. 17 June 2010." 13 November 2008. Nix.doe.” United States Department of Energy: Energy Information Administration.pdf>. 18 June 2010. Web. electricity/epm/epm_sum. 2009. Web. 13 December>. Web. "CRS Report for Congress: Power Plants Characteristics and Costs. Federation of American Scientists.S. June 2010. od/2008ngvavailable/a/ 23 October 2009.S.pdf>.” Reuters.S. Web.htm>.com>. “Electric Power Annual 2008.S.nrel. 18 June 2010.epa. <http:// www. Government Subsidies to Energy Sources. Timothy.pdf>. Department of Energy: Office of Cost Analysis. Web.” RenewableEnergyWorld. "Estimating U.htm>.

org." NaturalGas.stm>.doe. 2004. Web.” Organization for Economic Co-operation and 1 May 2007. 18 June 2010. http://www. 2 March 2009.blogspot. 20 June 2010. 16 June 2010. “Renewables in global energy supply: An IEA facts sheet. <http:// www. Web. Web. <http://www." Energy Information Administration 2009. 18 June 2010. “Can Geothermal Power Compete with Coal on Price?” Scientific American. <http://www.erec. 2010. Web." Energy Tomorrow.Energy Innovation in the U. Web. Natural Gas Supply Association. “Pumped Heat Electricity Storage”.html> Lipper. “Plugging Into the Sun. G. Web. "How Many Nuclear Power Plants to Reduce Atmospheric GHG Levels by 1 Ppm? « A Musing Environment.cgi/>. Print. 18 June 2010. Kropp. 18 June 2010. Print. "How Many Nuclear Plants Does It Take to Meet the World's Energy Needs?" NEI Nuclear Notes.htm>.” Transmission and Distribution World. "How Hybrids Work. Print. “Rise of Renewable Energy. D. 18 June 2010.” National Mims. Web.cfm?id=can-geothermal-power-compete-with-coal-on-price> Moscovic. 18 June article. September 2009: 28-53. Final Recommendations pg/10072/ 2006: 86-93. Web." How Hybrids Work. 2007. http:// www. <http://www.eia." NaturalGas. 07 Apr. April 2004. Web. 20 June "International Energy Outlook 2009.pdf> International Energy Agency. <http://www. 2004.aspx>. and John <http:// neinuclearnotes.umich.socialfunds.pdf>. Bill." University of Michigan. <http://www. 18 June 2010.php?page=storage Johnson.” Scientific American. "Index of /oceanography/issues/issue_archive/issue_pdfs. 13 Mar. Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Web. 3 March 2009." Paths of Light .A Photographic Gallery by Joel GAzisSAx. Web. "Natural Gas and Technology.asp>. Web." PostGazette. underground_transmission_distribution/ power_superconducting_cable_connects/>. Web." The Oceanography Society: Home. <http://www. <http://www.” Sustainability In vestment issue_archive/issue_pdfs/>.shtml>. 2010. <http://tdworld. <http://www. J.html>. Web. 9 June 2010.S. "Business Forum: Nuclear Power Plant Work Promises Jobs Bonanza.” European Renewable Energy Council. 10 August 2010. “Integration of Renewable Energy Sources. 18 June 2010.fueleconomy. Ilan. C. 18 Jun 2010.isentropic. "Nuclear Projcet_Documents/RES_in_EU_and_CC/backgroundpaper. 52 . “Superconducting Cable Connects the 18 June 2010.scientificamerican. “Solar Expected to Maintain Its Status as the World’s Fastest-Growing Energy Technology. <http://www. "Natural Gas and the Environment. <http://pathsoflight. "Industry Jobs.

org/Files/Schools/ Hydrogen/7HydrogenProductionNuclear. 16 June 2010 < daily.doe. Web. <http://www. "Nuclear Energy Institute . 18 June 2010.” U. 18 June newnuclearplants/buildingnewnuclearplants/>. Energy 27-Mar-2009 MW20090327>.eere. 18 Jun 2010.html>. <http://nei. Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting.html>. "Hydrogen Fact Sheet Hydrogen Production Nuclear.eia." Law360 : Energy : Lawsuit Filings. 2010. 15 June 2010 <>. "Nuclear Energy Institute . Verdicts and Court News.getenergysmart." Nuclear Energy Institute Clean-Air Energy. <http://energy. "Obama's Energy Plan.law360. 18 June 2010. Gas Subsidies ." Business & Financial "Nuclear Industry's Safety. Litigation." Nuclear Energy Institute .energy. S. Web.reuters." Energy Information Administration.Building New Nuclear Plants. 27 Mar. Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting. "Nuclear Power Economics | Nuclear Power Costs. Web.Energy Innovation in the U. < trend_2.Law360. Web. <http://www. WANO Indicators Show." Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Nuclear Energy Institute . Settlements. 20 June 2010. 18 June 2010. <http://nei. "Annual Energy Outlook 2010: With Projections to 2035: Electricity Demand." The New American. 20 June 2010. 27 January >. 53 .asp>.org/ resourcesandstats/documentlibrary/newplants/brochures/ nuclearpoweringamericasfuture/>.thenewamerican. 18 June 2010. Department of Energy. New York Public Service Commission. “New Energy for America Plan Sets High Goals for U. <http://nei.Nuclear Energy: Powering America's Future. <http://nei. Web. 18 June 2010. Final Recommendations <http://naturalgas.a Sustainable Energy Resource. <http:// world-nuclear. 18 June reliableandaffordableenergy/>. Reuters.pdf> Web. 2010. <http:// www." U.doe.Reliable & Affordable Energy. <http:// www.php/economy/markets-mainmenu-45/1221? Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Web.eia. Web. 2009. 01 Feb. 2010.S. Web. 18 June 2010.Clean-Air Energy. Breaking US & International News | Reuters. "Nuclear Energy Institute . Web. Operating Performance Remained Top-Notch in '08.Safety & Security.cfm/hp_news_id=149>.com/registrations/user_registration? article_id=146855&concurrency_check=false>." Nuclear Energy Institute .gov/reading-rm/doccollections/fact-sheets/decommissioning.nrc." Nuclear Energy Institute Clean-Air Energy. 2010. Energy Information Administration.S." World Nuclear Association | Nuclear Power . Web." New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.pdf> "NRC: Fact Sheet on Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants. "Annual Energy Outlook 2010 with Projections until 2035: US Energy Demand. Web. "Obama Budget Aims To Slash Oil.Clean-Air Energy.

S. Technology and Climate Policy Outlook.eia. <http://www. sectorprofiles/images/ “U." The National Energy Management Institute (NEMI).gov. "Plug-In Hybrids (or Plugin Hybrids). 2007. “Smart Grid Basics”. June 2010. 18 June 2010.aspx>." U. Web.calcars. Final Recommendations Oil Gas Map (Large). <http://www." The National Academies Press. Web. http://www. N.technologyreview. “Natural gas changes the energy map”. "Solar Financing. <http:// books. Web.>.eu/ research/energy/pdf/weto_presentation. 20 June 2010. 18 June 2010. David. Web.smartgrid.recovery.nap. February 2002. "Algae Biodiesel Research. Rotman. Web." Datab ase of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency.cfm?Incentive_Code=IL04R&re=1&ee=1 "Retro-commissioning Existing Building Inventory. Web. http://www. 15 June 2010. Web. Renewable Energy Source Maps”. "A History of Violations at Upper Big Branch Mine. " Renewable Portfolio Standard. 16 June 2010. < Guide to Solar and Renewable Energy. 8 June 2010. Zachary. Available online from <www. 2010.Energy Innovation in the>.pdf "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. 2010. <http://www. 11 June 2010. and Vivian Nereim. Rossetti di Valdalbero. Clean Technica.pdf >.S. 20Nuclear%20Power%20Engineering/Fast%20Breeder%20Reactors.stm>. "Program Plan.worldwatch. Web. http:// www. 18 June 2010.S.>." Net Files. Subsidies and Incentives. 15 June 2010. Renewable Energy Source Maps”.gov/ basics Snathanam.” U." The Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board: Recovery. "Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Bureau of Labor Statistics. stateoftheworld>. Web." Oilgae. 54 .com/pg/10096/1048188-455. 17 June 2010 <http:// cleantechnica." The Solar Guide . Global Climate Change. http://www.S. 2009.” Worldwatch Institute. 20 June 2010. 18 Jun 2010.bls." California Cars Initiative for Plug-In Hybrids. Global Climate 14 June 2010 <http://www.aspx?agency_code=91&progplanid=7550>. Print.html>. “U. Web. Sawin. <http:// www. Dennis B. Web. "Power Plant Operators. http:// Pew Center. Web. <https://netfiles. 09 Oct. Web.epa.S.nemionline.p. “State of the World into a Warming World. “Short Term Energy Outlook.uiuc. Energy Information Administration. June 2010. downloads/hvac/2_Retro-Commissioning. http://www. Web. North Carolina State University..html>. <http://www.Pew 18 June 2010. "Fast Breeder Reactors. and Dispatchers.pewclimate. 18 June 2010.jpg>.com/ solar-energy-systems/financing-incentives.” European Commission.go v/Transparency/agency/reporting/ agency_reporting5program. Domenico. <ec. Roddy.dsireusa.pdf>. 18 June 2010. 2030. 1 Mar. 06 Apr. Shahan. 16 June 2010. Janet and William Moomaw.thesolarguide.. “World

Web." Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency. <http://www. Web.usgbc. Web.Daily News. 09 April 2010. 18 June 2010. Josh.eere. "Ocean Renewable Energy's Potential Role in Supplying Future Electrical Energy Needs. and V.. Emissions Standard. <http:// www. 20 June 2010." The New York Times 14 Sept. “Solar Grand United States Environmental Protection Agency. Mason. Politics. 2007: 64-73. Web.” Scientific…/Outlook_2008." Gallup. “No Survivors Found After West Virginia Mine Disaster”.nytimes. Web.epa. 16 June 2010. Web. Web. http://www. Web. <http://www. June 2010. 18 June 2010. Politics." America .Engaging the World . Wang.>.Com . United States Department of Energy “Building Energy Codes”. United States Department of Energy. Writer." Oceanography 23. Polls. Print. 18 June 2010. Robert and Walter Musial. 20 June 2010. http://www.htm United States Green Building>. “Green Building”. K. 55 . <http:// www.” American Wind Energy Association.Energy Innovation in the U. http:// www1. Management.un. www. "G8 Nations Agree to Cut Carbon Emissions 80 Percent by 2050.propublica. 16 June 2010.energycodes. Print.pdf>. 09 July 2009. 19 June 2010.html>." Home | X PRIZE United States Department of>.gov/st/peacesec-english/2009/ July/20090709153615esnamfuak0. www. ProPublica. < Web. J.cfm? Incentive_Code=IL04R&re=1&ee=1. <http://www.” Marian.aspx>. Economics. Fthenakis. Web. Economics.dsireusa." Gallup.2.aspx>.org/apps/news/story. Polls.S. Web. "The Effects of Fossil-Fuel Subsidy Reform: A Review of Modeling and Empirical Studies.america. 18 June 2010. Public Opinion on>. Ian. 20 June "World Uranium Resources Ample for Projected Nuclear Energy Needs – UN Study.globalsubsidies." Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World. 4 Ma y 2010. Web. "Who We Are | X PRIZE Foundation. 17 June 2010. "U. Urbina. 18 June 2010.Daily News. 2008. Zweibel.3577082.awea. Web.America. www. 10 Ma y 2009. "Support for Nuclear Energy Inches Up to New High. <http://www. 18 June 2010. Web. 2009. “Save Energy Now”. Stephen Kaufman. North Carolina State University." Global Subsidies Initiative. “Wind Power Outlook 2008. Final Recommendations "Special Assessment for Solar Energy Systems. <www. 2010.Com . 18 June 2010. "White House Rolls Out Details of Auto Fuel Economy. Management. 18 June 2010. Public Opinion on Government. Support for Nuclear Power Climbs to New High of "Oil Companies Pay a Pittance in Penalties to Offshore Drilling Regulator.

MD Gatton Academy of Mathematics and Science Bowling Green. VA Rockdale Magnet School for Science and Technology Conyers. Sciences and the Arts Hot Springs. KY 56 . GA Crooms Academy of Information Technology Sanford. AR Liberal Arts and Science Academy Austin.S. AL Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology Alexandria. Acknowledgements Participating Schools The National summit is a signature event offered to member schools from the National Consortium for Specialized Schools of Mathematics Science and Technology (NCSSSMST). Schools attending the 2010 National Youth Policy Summit are: Conroe ISD Academy of Science and Technology The Woodlands. TX Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy Aurora.Energy Innovation in the U. IL Arkansas School for Mathematics. FL Science and Mathematics Academy at Aberdeen Aberdeen. TX Alabama School of Fine Arts Birmingham.

The Consortium is the nation's foremost alliance of schools dedicated to transforming mathematics. visit www. Science.S. Science and Technology has been a partner of the National Youth Policy Summit program since 2004. and Technology The National Consortium for Specialized Secondary Schools of Mathematics. For more information. 57 .ncsssmst. implementing and disseminating exemplary programs. Environmental Protection Agency Expert Panelists Thank you to the following individuals for sharing their expertise and technical knowledge by serving on the expert panel: Mathias Bell– Rocky Mountain Institute Lowrey Brown– Western Resource Advocates Dan Gibbs– Colorado State Senate Alice Madden– Colorado Governor's Energy Office Scott Moore– Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Robi Robichaud– National Renewable Energy Laboratory Wayne Rowe– Schlumberger Carbon Services Partners The National Consortium for Specialized Secondary Schools of Mathematics. The Consortium w as established in 1988 to provide a forum for schools to exchange information and program ideas and to evolve alliances betw een them.S. and technology education to create synergies among schools engaged in educational innovation by shaping national policy. testing. science. and developing.Energy Innovation in the fostering collaboration. Sponsors The Keystone Center would like to extend a special thank you to our sponsors who make this program possible: Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Edison Electric Institute Schlumberger Carbon Services U.

youthpolicysummit.keystone. CO 80435 www.INNOVATION LEADERSHIP SOLUTIONS The Keystone Center’s Youth Policy Summit is designed to advance critical thinking and problem solving skills in our leaders of the 970-513-5824 . The Keystone Center 1628 Sts John Rd. Ke ystone.