National Academies Report Released: An Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy's Marine and Hydrokinetic Resource Assessments

Recently, the National Academies Press (NAP) released a report produced by the Marine and Hydrokinetic Energy Technology Assessment Committee; Board on Energy and Environmental Systems; Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences; Ocean Studies Board; Division on Earth and Life Sciences; and the National Research Council titled, An Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy's Marine and Hydrokinetic Resource Assessments (2013). The 141-page report (available free with a one-time registration) discusses how,

[i]ncreasing renewable energy development, both within the United States and abroad, has rekindled interest in the potential for marine and hydrokinetic (MHK) resources to contribute to electricity generation. These resources derive from ocean tides, waves, and currents; temperature gradients in the ocean; and free-flowing rivers and streams. One measure of the interest in the possible use of these resources for electricity generation is the increasing number of permits that have been filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). As of December 2012, FERC had issued 4 licenses and 84 preliminary permits, up from virtually zero a decade ago. However, most of these permits are for developments along the Mississippi River, and the actual benefit realized from all MHK resources is extremely small. The first U.S. commercial gridconnected project, a tidal project in Maine with a capacity of less than 1 megawatt (MW), is currently delivering a fraction of that power to the grid and is due to be fully installed in 2013.

As part of its assessment of MHK resources, DOE asked the National Research Council (NRC) to provide detailed evaluations. In response, the NRC formed the Committee on Marine Hydrokinetic Energy Technology Assessment. As directed in its statement of task (SOT), the committee first developed an interim report, released in June 2011, which focused on the wave and tidal resource assessments (Appendix B). The current report contains the committee's evaluation of all five of the DOE resource categories as well as the committee's comments on the overall MHK resource assessment process. This summary focuses on the committee's overarching findings and conclusions regarding a conceptual framework for developing the resource assessments, the aggregation of results into a single number, and the consistency across and coordination between the individual resource assessments. Critiques of the individual resource assessment, further discussion of the practical MHK resource base, and overarching conclusions and recommendations are explained in An Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy's Marine and Hydrokinetic Resource Assessment.

GAO Report Released: Federal Rulemaking: Agencies Could Take Additional Steps to Respond to Public Comments

Recently, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report, titled Federal Rulemaking: Agencies Could Take Additional Steps to Respond to Public Comments GAO-13-21 (Dec. 20, 2012). The details of the 118-page report, available here, are discussed below:

Why GAO Did This Study

Agencies publish thousands of rules each year, with significant benefits and costs. Before issuing a final rule, agencies are generally required to publish an NPRM [notice of proposed rulemaking] in the Federal Register. Agencies must then respond to public comments when issuing final rules. Agencies may use exceptions in certain circumstances to forgo this NPRM process to expedite rulemaking. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has authority to provide guidance on regulatory issues. GAO was asked to provide information on the rulemaking process. This report addresses (1) how often agencies issued final rules without an NPRM; (2) which exceptions agencies used to do this; and (3) whether agencies took certain actions when issuing major rules without an NPRM, including voluntarily requesting and responding to public comments. GAO reviewed a generalizable random sample of 1,338 final rules published during calendar years 2003 through 2010. The sample contained rules by 52 agencies, including all cabinet departments issuing regulations. GAO completed more detailed analyses of 123 major rules without an NPRM, including every such rule published from 2007 through 2010, to obtain additional information to answer the objectives.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that OMB issue guidance to encourage agencies to respond to comments on final major rules, for which the agency has discretion, that are issued without a prior NPRM. OMB disagreed that guidance would offer substantial benefits. GAO believes the recommendation remains valid, as further discussed in the report.

GAO Report Released: Hanford Waste Treatment Plant: DOE Needs to Take Action to Resolve Technical and Management Challenges

Recently, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report, titled Hanford Waste Treatment Plant: DOE Needs to Take Action to Resolve Technical and Management Challenges GAO-13-38 (Dec. 19, 2012). The details of the 60-page report, available here, are discussed below:

Why GAO Did This Study

In December 2000, DOE awarded Bechtel a contract to design and construct the WTP project at DOE's Hanford Site in Washington State. This project--one of the largest nuclear waste cleanup facilities in the world-- was originally scheduled for completion in 2011 at an estimated cost of $4.3 billion. Technical challenges and other issues, however, have contributed to cost increases and schedule delays. GAO was asked to examine (1) remaining technical challenges, if any, the WTP faces; (2) the cost and schedule estimates for the WTP; and (3) steps DOE is taking, if any, to improve the management and oversight of the WTP project. GAO reviewed DOE and contractor data and documents, external review reports, and spoke with officials from DOE and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and with contractors at the WTP site and test facilities.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOE (1) not resume construction on WTP’s pretreatment and high-level waste facilities until, among other things, the facilities’ design has been completed to the level established by nuclear industry guidelines; (2) ensure the department’s contractor performance evaluation process does not prematurely reward contractors for resolving technical issues later found to be unresolved; and (3) take appropriate steps to determine whether any incentive payments were made erroneously and, if so, take actions to recover them. DOE generally agreed with the report and its recommendations.

GAO Report Released: Department of Energy: Better Information Needed to Determine If Nonmajor Projects Meet Performance Targets

Recently, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report, titled Department of Energy: Better Information Needed to Determine If Nonmajor Projects Meet Performance Targets GAO-13-129 (Dec. 19, 2012). The details of the 60-page report, available here, are discussed below:

Why GAO Did This Study

As of February 2011, EM and NNSA remained on GAO's high-risk list for contracting and project management. These two offices manage numerous construction and cleanup projects that each cost less than $750 million and are called nonmajor projects. DOE requires its program offices to establish performance targets for the expected scope, cost, and completion date of each project before starting construction or cleanup. GAO has encouraged federal agencies to use strategic workforce planning to help them meet present and future mission requirements. Two key elements of workforce planning are to identify mission-critical occupations and skills and any current and future shortfalls in these areas. GAO was asked to examine the (1) extent to which EM and NNSA nonmajor projects have met their scope, cost, and completion date targets, (2) factors affecting EM's and NNSA's management of nonmajor projects, and (3) extent to which EM's workforce plans identify mission-critical occupations and skills and any current and future shortfalls in these areas. GAO reviewed DOE documents and project data, examined EM workforce plans, toured selected DOE facilities, and interviewed DOE officials.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that EM and NNSA clearly define, document, and track the scope, cost, and completion date targets for each of their nonmajor projects and that EM clearly identify critical occupations and skills in its workforce plans. EM and NNSA agreed with GAO’s recommendations.

EPA & Dept. of Energy Release 2013 Fuel Economy Guide

Recently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), released the Fuel Economy Guide for 2013. According to the EPA press release for the 40-page report available here,

the 2013 Fuel Economy Guide, giving consumers clear and easy-to-read information to help them choose the most fuel efficient and low greenhouse gas emitting vehicles that meet their needs. The 2013 models include efficient and low-emission vehicles in a variety of classes and sizes, but notable this year is the growing availability of hybrids and the increasing number of electric vehicles.

. . .

This year’s guide gives consumers a broad range of information that they can use to select their next fuel efficient vehicle, whether they want to consider an electric vehicle or one that uses a more conventional fuel. This year, for the first time, EPA and DOE have added a second top ten list of most efficient vehicles -- separating advanced technology vehicles from conventional gasoline and diesel vehicles. Electric and plug-in hybrid electric models are the most fuel-efficient and lowest-emission vehicles available today and are becoming more common. At the same time, consumers may still look up the conventional gasoline and diesel models that offer superior fuel efficiency.

Prior versions of the Guide are available here. 
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008

In addition, the DOE's interactive Find-A-Car search "provides [user's with] the most up-to-date fuel economy information for vehicles from model year 1984 to the present, along with environmental and safety data." 

New U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) Newsletter

The U.S. Department of Energy 's (DOE) Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) recently began reissuing its OSTI Newsletter in an online format.  Beginning with July 2012, vol. 1 issue 1, this newsletter focuses on providing updates on the "OSTI Mission: Advancing science and sustaining technological creativity by making R&D findings available and useful to  . . . [ ] DOE researchers and the public."  In addition, it appears that the newsletter will also incorporate the DOE's new monthly Science Showcase, a monthly update that provides researchers with information relating to the DOE's document and database holdings in certain hot topic areas (see below). RSS feeds are available for OSTI updates and email subscriptions are available for the newsletter.

Previous Showcases:

Wind Power (Aug. 2012).
Nanotechnology (July 2012).
Fuel Cells Research (June 2012).
Computing Research (June 2012).

  

GAO Report Released: EPA Regulations & Electricity Better Monitoring by Agencies Could Strengthen Efforts to Address Potential Challenges

Recently the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its report, titled EPA Regulations & Electricity Better Monitoring by Agencies Could Strengthen Efforts to Address Potential Challenges GAO-12-635 (July 17, 2012). This one hundred page report, available here, was conducted because the

EPA recently proposed or finalized four regulations affecting coal-fueled electricity generating units . . . (1) the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule; (2) the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards; (3) the proposed Cooling Water Intake Structures regulation; and (4) the proposed Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals regulation . . . EPA estimated two of the regulations would prevent thousands of premature deaths and generate $160-$405 billion in annual benefits. [however] [s]ome stakeholders have expressed concerns that these regulations could increase electricity prices and compromise reliability—the ability to meet consumers' demand . . . [Here] GAO was asked to examine: (1) actions power companies may take in response to these regulations; (2) their potential electricity market and reliability implications; and (3) the extent to which these implications can be mitigated.

Ultimately the GAO recommend that the EPA, DOE and FERC "take additional steps" to monitor industry's compliance; EPA & DOE agreed while FERC disagreed.

Additional Resources:

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, EPA (last visited Aug. 17, 2012).

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, EPA (last visited Aug. 17, 2012).

Cooling Water Intake Structures - CWA §316(b), EPA (last visited Aug. 17, 2012) (scroll down to link for the Federal Register Notice).

Coal Combustion Residuals - Proposed Rule, EPA (last visited Aug. 17, 2012) (scroll down to link for the Federal Register Notice).

U.S. Department of Energy's 2011 Wind Technologies Market Report Released

Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) released its report titled, 2011 Wind Technologies Market Report.  The report, which was produced by the DOE's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory discusses how,  "the United States remained one of the world’s largest and fastest growing wind markets in 2011, with wind power representing a remarkable 32 percent of all new electric capacity additions in the United States last year and accounting for $14 billion in new investment."  For those unfamiliar with it,  

[t]he report, which has been issued annually since 2007, analyzes a range of developments in the wind market, including trends in wind project installations, turbine size, turbine prices, wind project costs, project performance, and wind power prices. The report also details trends in project financing, a key concern for the wind industry in the current economic climate, as well as trends in project ownership, public policy, and the integration of wind power into the electrical grid. The report provides the wind industry, state and local policy makers, and the general public with valuable information on the state of wind power in the United States.

The DOE does not have one centralized location for its past reports, however, previous editions on the Wind Technologies Market Reports have been collected below:
2011 
2010 
2009 
2008

Related Reports: 
Annual Report on U.S. Wind Power Installation, Cost and Performance Trends
2007
2006

Tools and Best Practices for Implementing Green Leasing -- DOE Webinar

Tools and Best Practices for Implementing Green Leasing

Monday, March 26, 2012 1:00 PM - 2:30 PM EDT


Misaligned incentives between building owners and tenants are a prominent barrier to increasing energy efficiency in commercial buildings. Typical leases either do not hold the tenant accountable for energy costs or do not allow building owners to recoup energy cost savings from efficiency investments. Green leasing (or energy- efficient leasing) is a non-technical solution that allows property owners and occupants to share energy-efficiency costs and benefits.


This webinar, showcasing green leasing as a market solution to improve building energy efficiency, is targeted to a broad audience, from building owners and tenant organizations to lawyers and building raters. The webinar will introduce a new green leasing library website offering a one-stop-shop for green leasing resources, developed in coordination with BOMA, Rocky Mountain Institute, Natural Resources Defense Council, the U.S. Department of Energy, NYU, GSA, and the Institute for Market Transformation.

The webinar speakers will present on the following topics:

- What is green leasing and what barriers does it seeks to overcome

- Challenges and opportunities to implementing green leasing

- Components and mechanics of a green lease

- Best practices in adopting green leases

- Strategies for negotiating lease clauses with tenants

- GSA’s efforts to implement green leasing practices

Building Re-Tuning Training: Providing Energy Saving Solutions through Interactive e-Learning -- PNNL

Building Re-Tuning Training: Providing Energy Saving Solutions through Interactive e-Learning from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 

"PNNL initiated the Commercial Building Re-tuning project for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Building Technologies Program. The goal of this project is to improve building operations by transferring the skills to “re-tune” large (>100,000 sf) commercial buildings through a series of training programs and development of an online interactive training curriculum. The project will target technicians currently working in the industry for an immediate impact. The re-tuning training is intended to provide building operators, building managers and energy service providers with the necessary skills to identify no- and low-cost operational problems that plague commercial buildings and provide the skills necessary to take corrective action. The secondary goal of the project is to train a number of “trainers” to carry out the re-tuning training beyond this project."

New Lighting Technologies -- DOE Webcast

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) will kick off this year's First Thursday Seminars on February 2 with a live webcast titled New Lighting Technologies.

The webcast will take place from 1:30 to 3:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

Experts Jeff McCullough of DOE's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Brian Liebel of The Lighting Partnership, and Shawn Herrera of FEMP, will offer training in the uses and benefits of spectrally enhanced lighting and outdoor solid state lighting.

Specifically, the instructors will provide training on how to:

• Select optimal lighting solutions designed for a range of applications, based on performance data collected from a variety energy-saving lighting products
• Calculate life-cycle costs and assess the feasibility of various system designs and installation options
• Measure the savings you gain from energy-efficient lighting projects to verify the benefits of your decisions
• Use DOE and industry resources to support your selections and facilitate your work

Participants are encouraged to email or call in their questions before and during the program to receive tailored advice from the experts during the live "Q&A" segment. Questions submitted before the program can be sent to FTS@energyworkshops.org.

The 90-minute webcast is free of charge, but you must register in advance to obtain an Internet URL for the presentation. The broadcast of New Lighting Technologies will take place Thursday, February 2, from 1:30 to 3:00 p.m. EST.

"Assessment of Energy Production Potential from Tidal Streams in the United States -- DOE

This report from the Department of Energy Assessment of Energy Production Potential from Tidal Streams in the United Statesdated June 29, 2011 finds that tidal stream energy is one of the alternative energy sources that are renewable and clean. This project created a national database of tidal stream energy potential, as well as a GIS tool usable by industry in order to accelerate the market for tidal energy conversion technology.

Tidal currents are numerically modeled with the Regional Ocean Modeling System and calibrated with the available measurements of tidal current speed and water level surface. The performance of the model in predicting the tidal currents and water levels is assessed with an independent validation. 

^{The results of the regional assessment show that the state of Alaska (AK) contains the largest number of locations with considerably high kinetic power density, and is followed by, Maine (ME), Washington (WA), Oregon (OR), California (CA), New Hampshire (NH), Massachusetts (MA), New York (NY), New Jersey (NJ), North and South Carolina (NC, SC), Georgia (GA), and Florida (FL). The average tidal stream power density at some of these locations can be larger than 8 kW/m2 with surface areas on the order of few hundred kilometers squared, and depths larger than 100 meters. The Cook Inlet in AK is found to have a substantially large tidal stream power density sustained over a very large area.}

Mapping and Assessment of the United States Ocean Wave Energy Resource -- DOE

This Department of Energy report Mapping and Assessment of the United States Ocean Wave Energy Resourcedated 2011 was prepared by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), with support and data validation from researchers at Virginia Tech and DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).

"The report describes the methods used to produce geospatial data and to map the average annual and monthly significant wave height, wave energy period, mean direction, and wave power density in the coastal United States. NREL incorporated the data into a new marine and hydrokinetic energy section in their U.S. Renewable Resource atlas.

In addition to the wave and tidal resource assessments released today, DOE plans to release additional resource assessments for ocean current, ocean thermal gradients, and new hydropower resources in 2012. To support the development of technologies that can tap into these vast water power resources, DOE's Water Power Program is undertaking a detailed technical and economic assessment of a wide range of water power technologies in order to more accurately predict the opportunities and costs of developing and deploying these innovative technologies. The Program is currently sponsoring over 40 demonstration projects that will advance the commercial readiness of these systems, provide first-of-a-kind, in-water performance data that will validate cost-of-energy predictions, and identify pathways for large cost reductions.

These resource assessments, techno-economic assessments, and technology demonstration projects are critical elements of DOE's strategy to capture the very real opportunities associated with water power development, and to further define the path to supplying 15% of the nation's electricity through water power technologies."

Energy Innovation Summit -- DOE

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy (ARPA-E) will hold its third annual Energy Innovation Summit from February 27–29, 2012 at the Gaylord Convention Center just outside Washington, D.C.


"Now in its third year, the Summit is designed to unite key players from all sectors of the nation’s energy innovation community to share ideas for developing and deploying the next generation of clean energy technologies. The event is co-hosted by ARPA-E and Clean Technology and Sustainable Industries Organization (CTSI).


Last year’s annual ARPA-E Energy Innovation Summit attracted more than 90 speakers and 2,000 attendees from 49 states and 20 countries. Attendees included members of research and development institutions, global corporations, technology entrepreneurs, investors, policymakers and government officials.

The event will feature a technology showcase with more than 150 exhibits from DOE and ARPA-E-funded projects and applicants in areas such as energy storage technologies for electrical grids, power electronics, batteries for electric vehicles, energy-efficient building technologies, advanced carbon capture, and electrofuels. The showcase will also feature new ARPA-E programs that aim to advance alternatives to rare earth materials, plant engineering for fuel applications, advanced thermal storage, network integration architecture for the electrical grid, and power electronics for solar photovoltaic applications. A wide range of other energy technologies and new topic areas will also be discussed at the Summit."

Nuclear Fuel Cycle Options: DOE Needs to Enhance Planning for Technology Assessment and Collaboration with Industry and Other Countries -- GAO

This Government Accountability Office Report (GAO-12-70 October 17, 2011)  finds that the (DOE) issued a research and development (R&D) plan to select nuclear fuel cycles and technologies, some of which reprocess spent fuel and recycle some nuclear material, such as plutonium. These fuel cycles may help reduce the generation of spent fuel and risks of nuclear proliferation and terrorism. GAO was asked to review (1) DOE's approach to selecting nuclear fuel cycles and technologies, (2) DOE's efforts to reduce proliferation and terrorism risks, and (3) selected countries' experiences in reprocessing and recycling spent fuel. GAO reviewed DOE's plan and met with officials from DOE, the nuclear industry, and France and the United Kingdom.

DOE's R&D plan relies on a systematic approach--that is, the use of scientific methods and engineering principles--to select and demonstrate nuclear fuel cycles and associated technologies. However, it does not explain the current readiness levels of the technologies associated with the fuel cycles and the estimated time and cost of further development; it also does not explain how DOE will collaborate with the nuclear industry and other countries experienced in nuclear R&D in achieving its goals."

                       

2012 (Auto) Fuel Economy Guide -- DOE

The 2010 Fuel Economy Guide details the miles-per-gallon acheived by 2012 model year automobiles sold in the United States.

Nuclear Waste: Disposal Challenges and Lessons Learned from Yucca Mountain -- GAO

This Government Accountability Office report (GAO-11-731T), dated June 1, 2011, finds that uncertainties exist about the direction of the nation’s policy for nuclear waste disposal. Under NWPA, DOE investigated Yucca Mountain as a site for a repository. In 2002, DOE recommended the site to the President and in 2008 submitted a license application to NRC.

DOE is now seeking to withdraw the application from NRC’s Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. DOE did not cite technical or safety issues but stated that Yucca Mountain is not a workable option because of a lack of public acceptance by the people of Nevada. On June 29, 2010, the board denied DOE’s motion, ruling that NWPA requires DOE to continue the licensing effort.

The NRC commissioners announced they might consider reviewing the board’s decision, but as of May 26, 2011, no review had been announced. Separately, state and local governments and a private party filed suit in federal court against DOE and NRC in an effort to stop the repository termination. The court has not yet ruled. Amid this uncertainty, DOE took steps to shut down Yucca Mountain by September 30, 2010. DOE also established a Blue Ribbon Commission to evaluate alternatives for nuclear waste disposal, which plans to report by January 2012.

Three primary waste storage options offer benefits but also face challenges, including high costs. Two options are for interim storage—continued on-site or centralized storage—which could allow time for research into new approaches that might have wider public acceptance than the Yucca Mountain permanent repository. Continued on-site storage would require less effort to implement since it is the current method of waste storage.

However, this option could trigger significant financial liabilities as a result of industry lawsuits stemming from DOE’s failure to accept the waste in 1998, as required under NWPA. The federal government has already paid $956 million, and future liabilities are estimated to be at least $15.4 billion through 2020. DOE and the Navy also might not meet certain commitments to remove their waste from two states, which could bring penalties and a suspension of the Navy’s shipments of spent fuel, raising concerns about the Navy’s ability to refuel its nuclear-powered warships.

The second interim option, centralized interim storage, may face challenges because DOE states that it currently has no authority to implement this option.

The third option, a geologic repository, is widely considered the only currently feasible option for permanently disposing of nuclear waste. DOE has faced challenges in identifying an acceptable site for permanent geologic disposal. Restarting the search would likely take decades and cost billions of dollars. Published reports and interviews--with federal, state, and local government officials and representatives of various organizations--suggest two broad lessons that can be learned from past nuclear waste management efforts.

Commercial Nuclear Waste: Effects of a Termination of the Yucca Mountain Repository Program and Lessons Learned -- GAO

This report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO-11-229), dated April 2011, finds that "terminating the Yucca Mountain repository program could bring benefits, such as allowing DOE to search for a more acceptable alternative, which
could help avoid the costly delays experienced by Yucca Mountain. However,
there is no guarantee that a more acceptable or less costly alternative will be
identified; termination could instead restart a costly and time-consuming
process to find and develop an alternative permanent solution. It would also
likely prolong the need for interim storage of spent nuclear fuel at reactor
sites, which would have financial and other impacts. For example, the federal
government bears part of the storage costs as a result of industry lawsuits
over DOE’s failure to take custody of commercial spent nuclear fuel in 1998,
as required. These costs exceed $15.4 billion and could grow by an additional
$500 million a year after 2020."

Sustainability for the Global Biofuels Industry - Minimizing Risks and Maximizing Opportunities -- DOE Webinar

The U.S. Department of Energy's Biomass Program is hosting a webinar on Tuesday, May 17, 2011, from 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. EDT, entitled "Sustainability for the Global Biofuels Industry: Minimizing Risks and Maximizing Opportunities." This Web conference is the next installment in the Biomass Program's webinar series, which will cover many of the Program's activities and feature discussions on "Hot Topics" relevant to the development of renewable fuels, power, and products from biomass resources.

This webinar will feature an overview of sustainability issues related to the development of a global biofuels market. A panel of speakers from Conservation International will be discussing results of the DOE-supported Sustainable Biofuel Crops Project, including identified risks and opportunities for global biofuels production, results of field studies to develop responsible biofuel crop management strategies, and implications for land-use planning, policy and developing markets.

DOE's Biomass Program welcomes interested stakeholders from industry, academia, research institutions, government, non-profits, other organizations, and the general public. Presenters include:

DOE Biomass Program


•Alison Goss Eng, Sustainability Lead
•Ranyee Chiang, AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow

Conservation International


•Christine Dragisic, Director, Agriculture, Biofuel, & Forestry
•Lucio Bede, Atlantic Forest Program Manager, Conservation International Brazil
•Jenny Hewson, Technical Advisor for Land Use Monitoring and REDD Analyses
•Tim Killeen, Senior Research Scientist
•Manuel Oliva, Director, U.S. Climate Policy
•Conrad Savy, Senior Science Advisor, Business & Government Engagement

Energy Conservation Modeling for Weatherization -- DOE Webinar

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Technical Assistance Program (TAP) for state and local officials will present a webinar next Wednesday about how to calculate energy savings for weatherization projects in multifamily buildings. At the webinar, you will hear about how to interpret energy calculations based on models used in savings calculations for commercial buildings. Ed Pierce, a researcher at the DOE Oak Ridge National Laboratory, will present these findings.

The presentation will take place April 27, from 3:00 to 4:15 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time, and is titled Energy Conservation Modeling for Weatherization.