Court throws out fraud suit filed against LEED program

                  Updated  at 2:55 p.m. on August 8, 2011 to add related news stories

“”The U.S. District Court in New York City yesterday (August 17, 2011) dismissed a lawsuit charging the U.S. Green Building Council with false advertising over its Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification, “the Environmental Leader blog  reports.

“Henry Gifford, an energy efficiency professional, filed the class action suit in October. He alleged that USGBC has falsely claimed that its rating system makes buildings save energy. Gifford has claimed that buildings can receive the highest LEED ratings regardless of how much energy or water they use.

“USGBC said the court dismissed the federal false advertising claims “with prejudice,” meaning plaintiffs are barred from filing a new suit based on those claims, and also dismissed the plaintiffs’ false advertising claims made under state law.

“The court held that none of the plaintiffs in the action had alleged or could allege any legal interest that would be protected by their lawsuit, the council said.”

Read the entire story at: USGBC Beats LEED False Advertising Claims

Are you a member of the U.S. Green Building Council?  Or have had some other involvement with the organization’s LEED program?  What do you think about it? Share your thoughts in the Comment box below. If one is not visible, activate it by clicking on the tiny ‘comments’ link. 


Related:
$100M Lawsuit Against LEED Dismissed by Federal Judge
Gifford Lawsuit Against USGBC, LEED Dismissed 

Our most recent posts:  

New Jersey considering a floor price for solar credits
Follow today’s hearing on NJ’s energy plan on Twitter 
NJ appeals court: Environment trumps housing for poor
Which governor is ditching renewable energy?  
NJ court sides with developer on Highlands exemption


———————————————————————————————————————————-

Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics

Try it free for 30 days!  No obligation. Cancel anytime with one click 

Court throws out fraud suit filed against LEED program Read More »

New Jersey considering a floor price for solar credits

[Updated on  8/22/11 to add two related stories]

The number of new solar energy systems generating electricity in New Jersey more than doubled last year.

That’s good news, right?  Yes, but, as usual, there’s a catch.

New Jersey uses a market-based, supply-and-demand system to subsidize the cost of solar panel installations. It has helped to propel the state into the #2 spot nationally (only California has more solar panels). Read below how the system works and you’ll understand the ‘catch.’

A simplified version of how New Jersey’s SREC system works 

  1. When a business, town, school or individual homeowner has solar panels installed, they receive a certain number of Solar Renewable Energy Certificates (SRECs) based on the amount of energy the system will generate.
  2. The owners of energy plants that emit greenhouse-gas-producing carbon dioxide (CO2) are required by the state to buy enough SRECs each year to offset the amount of CO2 that their plants release to  the atmosphere.
  3. The price of the SRECs depends on the number of solar systems in operation. With fewer systems, the demand for available certificates pushes the price that power plant operators are willing to pay for the credits higher. Similarly, as the number of systems increase, the demand (and price) for individual SRECs decreases.
The ‘catch’ is that, as New Jerseyans continue to install solar panels, SREC prices continue to fall–and they’re falling fast. Once pegged at $600, individual credits were trading this week at $115, according to Flett Exchange, which tracks the market.

Without the prospect of a substantial SREC price, the cost of installing a solar systems becomes less attractive to homeowners and others. So solar installations slow down and fossil-fueled energy use continues to grow.

What can be done to improve the value of solar certificates?

The state’s Board of Utilities, which regulates and promotes clean energy programs, is giving thought to setting a floor price for SRECs, according to a news story in yesterday’s Star-Ledger. 
Meanwhile, in the state legislature, the Energy and Environment Committee held several hearings on S-2317, sponsored by committee chairman Bob Smith. The bill would accelerate by one year state requirements for how much renewable energy must be produced (portfolio standards), forcing power companies to buy more SRECs. The bill passed the Senate in late June and awaits action in the Assembly.
If you haven’t already, use the signup form in the upper right-hand column to subscribe to this blog. We’ll keep you up to date on regulatory, legislative and other developments that will influence the future of solar energy in New Jersey.

Follow today’s hearing on NJ’s energy plan on Twitter 
NJ appeals court: Environment trumps housing for poor 
Which governor is ditching renewable energy? 

NJ court sides with developer on Highlands exemption
Oil industry: Fracking can’t harm groundwater. Really?   

———————————————————————————————————————————-

Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics

Try it free for 30 days!  No obligation. Cancel anytime with one click 

New Jersey considering a floor price for solar credits Read More »

Follow today’s hearing on NJ’s energy plan on Twitter

The New Jersey Legislature is not broadcasting today’s joint Senate and Assembly environmental committee hearing on the state Board of Public Utilities’proposed

Energy Management Plan.

But some attendees in the audience are posting updates on Twitter.

If you’re on Twitter, use hashtag #njemp (for New Jersey Energy Management Plan)
to follow along.

———————————————————————————————————————————-

Our most recent posts: 

NJ appeals court: Environment trumps housing for poor

NJ court sides with developer on Highlands exemption
Oil industry: Fracking can’t harm groundwater. Really? 
Wind energy proposal leaves NJ regulators guessing 
  
———————————————————————————————————————————-

Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics

Try it free for 30 days!  No obligation. Cancel anytime with one click 

Follow today’s hearing on NJ’s energy plan on Twitter Read More »

NJ appeals court: Environment trumps housing for poor

    [Updated at 4 p.m. on 8/16/11 and at 4:18 p.m. to add two related news stories]

For months, advocates for the poor and advocates for the environment, usually liberal soul-mates, have been butting heads in New Jersey over providing for affordable housing in the state’s environmentally sensitive Highlands region.

Yesterday, the affordable housing advocates came away with the headache while the enviros emerged smiling as a state appellate court ruled that development restrictions in the Highlands Act can proceed.

The Star-Ledger reported that housing advocates slammed the decisions, saying the Highlands plan does nothing to spur construction of homes or apartments for low- and moderate-income residents.

“There are no regulations at all in the Highlands,” said Kevin Walsh, counsel to the Fair Share Housing Center. “The Highlands Council is making things up as they go along. That’s not the way our government is supposed to work.”

Eileen Swan, executive director of the Highlands Council, said the council is “very pleased” with the ruling.

“It affirms our work,” she said. “The method by which the regional master plan was adopted was more rigorous than any rule making. We are always very careful to go back to the Highlands Act and make sure we are always consistent with it.”

Read the entire Star-Ledger story here. NJ Spotlight story here  Bergen Record story here.

———————————————————————————————————————————-
Our most recent posts: 
Which governor is ditching renewable energy?
NJ court sides with developer on Highlands exemption
Oil industry: Fracking can’t harm groundwater. Really?
Wind energy proposal leaves NJ regulators guessing
Up next: Moving PA’s Marcellus Shale gas to market
 
———————————————————————————————————————————-

Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics

Try it free for 30 days!  No obligation. Cancel anytime with one click 

NJ appeals court: Environment trumps housing for poor Read More »

Which governor is ditching renewable energy?

A major state newspaper yesterday reported:

“The __________ administration is de-emphasizing renewable energy and energy conservation, eliminating programs created by previous Democratic and Republican administrations as it focuses on natural gas…”

How would you fill in that blank?
If you live in New Jersey you’ll probably answer: Christie.
The administration of Governor Chris Christie has just finished a series of public hearings on a revised Energy Management Plan which would reduce the state’s goal of using energy generated from alternative sources like wind and solar. The proposed plan supports what the governor’s office has been actively pushing–the construction of new power plants fueled by natural gas–and also leaves the door open to the expansion of some of the state’s nuclear energy facilities. Christie also is withdrawing the state from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) which provides funding for alternative energy technologies.
However, if you live in Pennsylvania, your likely answer would be: Corbett.
Which is correct?
Probably both.
Yesterday’s story, from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, reports how the administration of Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett 

“quietly but systematically…has all but shut down the state Department of Environmental Protection’s Office of Energy and Technology Deployment — the state’s primary energy office — and removed directors and reassigned staff in the Office of Energy Management in the Department of General Services and the Governor’s Green Government Council.”

The newspaper says that the administration has also “forbidden state executive agencies from signing contracts that support clean energy supply.”

Why?

“The administration says merely that any changes are part of a new approach of Gov. Tom Corbett’s energy executive, Patrick Henderson, who has been overseeing development of the administration’s Marcellus Shale gas policy. But environmental organizations and former DEP officials and staffers say the dismantling of successful programs promoting renewable and sustainable.”

Could this be as nakedly political as it sounds? Well, let’s recap:

  1. Renewable and sustainable energy programs are being chopped at the orders of a guy who’s in charge of Marcellus Shale (natural gas) policy.  
  2. The Corbett Administration has been bending over backwards to do whatever it can for the natural gas drilling industry which contributed substantially to Mr. Corbett’s election campaign.  
But why, a reasonable observer might observe, must renewable and sustainable energy development be downsized? Can’t Pennsylvania be equally supportive of programs that generate energy from endlessly renewable wind and solar sources as those that require the extraction, treatment and transmission of nonrenewable natural gas?   
Why can’t we have both?

It’s a question that’s relevant in both states. Why can’t we have both? In fact, is it not irresponsible to exclusively support the exploitation of nonrenewable fossil fuel, knowing that the inevitable day will come when oil and natural gas runs out and the nation’s energy needs will have to be met by renewable sources?   

Who is making these decisions that seem to fly in the face of common sense? And why? 

Tell us what you think in the comment box below. If one isn’t visible, click on the tiny ‘comments’ link.

———————————————————————————————————————————-
Our most recent posts:
NJ court sides with developer on Highlands exemption
Oil industry: Fracking can’t harm groundwater. Really?
Wind energy proposal leaves NJ regulators guessing
Up next: Moving PA’s Marcellus Shale gas to market
Crucial tax credit bill introduced for offshore wind
 
———————————————————————————————————————————-

Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics

Try it free for 30 days!  No obligation. Cancel anytime with one click 

Which governor is ditching renewable energy? Read More »

NJ court sides with developer on Highlands exemption

“The New Jersey Appellate Division delivered a rebuke to the state’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) on August 1, finding that DEP’s Commissioner ignored undisputed evidence and made critical legal errors in holding that two development projects did not qualify for an exemption from the strict requirements of the Highlands Water Protection and Planning Act.

“The court’s decision in Lakeside Manor v. State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection reversed the Commissioner’s decision, finding that the developer had satisfied all statutory requirements for the exemption.”

So writes attorney Paul M. Hauge of the Gibbons law firm yesterday in an alert to the firm’s clients.

You can read the entire alert at:
Court Overrules DEP, Finds Developer Was Entitled to Exemption From Highlands Act

———————————————————————————————————————————-
Our most recent posts:
Oil industry: Fracking can’t harm groundwater. Really?
Wind energy proposal leaves NJ regulators guessing
Up next: Moving PA’s Marcellus Shale gas to market
Crucial tax credit bill introduced for offshore wind
Drink a beer – Save the planet 
 
———————————————————————————————————————————-

Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics

Try it free for 30 days!  No obligation. Cancel anytime with one click.

NJ court sides with developer on Highlands exemption Read More »

Verified by MonsterInsights