State Seeks Ideas for Clean-Energy Apps

By KAT FRIEDRICH/ecoMass News contributor

A state Department of Energy Resources marketer who wants to collaborate with civic-minded hackers has invited Massachusetts residents to submit ideas for clean-energy apps by responding to a post on the Energy Smarts blog.

The post, “Clean Energy Hack for Good,” encourages computer professionals to join a volunteer meet-up called Code for Boston. Tom Witkin, the department’s marketing and collaboration coordinator, plans to share the energy-app ideas he receives with Code for Boston members to catalyze innovation.

Read more…

Research Skills Can Strengthen Energy Journalism

claimtoken-50a01a203f085What makes energy journalism worth reading? Critical thinking, synthesis of information and perspectives, and coverage of the real-world impacts of programs can differentiate quality energy writing from other energy news.

I curate and write energy news for the Clean Energy Finance Center. So I’ve sorted through thousands of RSS posts and many Google alerts, looking for content that contains quality analysis and newsworthy ideas.

After reading these articles, I began asking questions about how energy journalism can be improved. A recent article from Grist explores this question from an industry-wide perspective. In this post, I’m offering a counterpoint to the Grist article by taking a “nuts and bolts” approach and brainstorming about how writers can improve their work.

A blog post from SmartPlanet has critiqued the absence of critical thinking and data analysis in some energy journalism. In January, I wrote a follow-up post with suggestions about how writers can ask questions about their data and get better results.

Thinking about the sources and reliability of data is just the beginning of retooling energy journalism, though. To make energy writing jump off the screen and catch readers’ attention, writers should try synthesizing information in original ways and reaching outside the field for ideas from other sources.

The Energy Efficiency Markets Blog* stands out as a very strong example of information synthesis. The authors of this blog draw ideas from multiple sources rather than writing single-sourced articles. They also develop interesting and original angles for stories.

Synthesizing ideas from multiple sources is one way to add depth to news stories and to combine ideas from interviewees who may disagree with one another. This can make energy journalism both more useful and more engaging than it would be otherwise.

Drawing on ideas from multiple stakeholders can also introduce practical perspectives. Practical perspectives can strengthen news articles, connect ideas to everyday life, and add human interest. I would encourage energy writers to reach beyond their usual lists of sources. For example, an article on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act might benefit from quotes from workforce development professionals, people whose homes have been weatherized, and green jobs training program graduates.

Including quotes and photos of weatherization can be one way to tell the story of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. (Source: Photobucket)

Energy efficiency and renewable energy decisions are not just theoretical mathematical exercises. Including the everyday stories of people who participate in these programs and/or benefit from them can add human interest to these stories and help a broader audience relate to them.

If you take the idea of synthesis to its logical conclusion, you’ll arrive at interdisciplinarity. One reason I combine communications ideas with writing about technical subjects is that I’m convinced these two fields can benefit from collaboration. Communicators can benefit from learning more about math and science, including how to cover it accurately. Engineering and science professionals can also benefit from learning communications skills.

Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum, in their book Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future, have recommended training science graduates in media skills and paying them to do outreach.

Some energy organizations encourage researchers to write articles already. Many of the best articles I see on energy efficiency and renewable energy are produced by researchers, not media professionals. If research organizations start investing more in outreach than they do today – a step which I believe is necessary in the face of climate change and widespread science illiteracy – some of these researchers may end up as communicators.

Some of the skills that improve research – synthesis, critical thinking and awareness of practical outcomes – are the same skills which can strengthen energy journalism. So I’d encourage energy writers to think like researchers. I’d also encourage energy researchers to learn media skills and write news articles.

* Disclaimer: I collaborate with one of the authors of the Energy Efficiency Markets Blog.

---

This post won’t be complete until I invite you to follow me on Twitter and like my Facebook page.

Energy Efficiency Researchers Dig into the Deep South

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), where I worked for two years, is delving into questions which are relevant to Southern states and  working-class communities. I support this approach because it’s essential for environmental nonprofits to take on questions that reach beyond the East and West Coasts and outside the Beltway.

The first report showing that ACEEE was pursuing this course of action was the May 2012 publication Opportunity Knocks: Examining Low-Ranking States in Energy Efficiency. These states are mainly located in the Southeast and the northern Great Plains, where lack of awareness of the benefits of energy efficiency often combines with skepticism and an aversion to top-down mandates.

The theme of avoiding government mandates has emerged in ACEEE’s behavioral research. An article from Real Energy Writers reports that ACEEE Behavior and Human Dimensions Program director Susan Mazur-Stommen has been touring the South. She’s been interviewing people about what energy efficiency means in their lives. Her discoveries so far are intriguing. Many of her interviewees are aware of energy efficiency, but are pursuing it independently and not through structured programs.

“People are pursuing green in the South, but they are doing it in their own way. That is one of the messages. They don’t trust the government. They don’t trust their utility. They worry about scams,” Mazur-Stommen said in her interview with journalist Elisa Wood. Mazur-Stommen said that messaging about energy efficiency in the South needs to be customized for regional viewpoints.

Economic opportunity may be a valuable angle. In August, ACEEE published a fact sheet on Energy Efficiency and Economic Opportunity which addresses the importance of designing energy efficiency programs so that they build stable employment in local communities. As the fact sheet says:

At every step of the economic value chain produced by efficiency investments… there are opportunities to target the economic and social benefits to those households, businesses, geographies, or sectors for whom they will make the biggest difference. The results of these choices can include lower costs for low- and moderate-income families and small businesses; opportunities for disadvantaged, local workers to get jobs with good wages; and new and retained economic activity in disinvested communities.

This is a crucial statement. Given the large number of American communities suffering after the recession, it’s absolutely essential for environmental nonprofits to discuss socioeconomic issues.

Working-class communities sometimes include manufactured homes. Mobilizing Energy Efficiency in the Manufactured Housing Sector, a report which ACEEE published in July, broke new ground by charting the potential energy savings in manufactured homes. 

Manufactured houses waste energy as if their owners had money to spare – which they often do not. Builders of manufactured homes focus on cost and have relatively easygoing code requirements. As a result, these homes have high energy bills.

The report says making manufactured housing more energy-efficient could save 40 percent of the total electricity consumption and 33 percent of the total natural gas consumption of these homes between 2011 and 2030.

Energy Journalism: Cleaning up the Numbers

Energy journalism can be challenging for reporters. An article on SmartPlanet.com spells out the reasons energy journalism is often low-quality and offers some suggestions for improvement. Since I worked for an energy efficiency research organization for two years and wrote my graduate thesis on the media coverage of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil drilling controversy, I’m going to start where the author ended and provide suggestions for cleaning up energy-related stories.

Question Authorities

Uncritical acceptance of authorities’ statements can cause problems in energy journalism. Here are some litmus tests for reporters:

1. Is the authority qualified to answer the question? If one is quoting politicians on the amount of oil present in a wildlife refuge, for example, errors are very likely. I’ve seen many examples of journalists missing opportunities to fact-check numbers from non-experts.
2. Who is funding the research? If the funding is tied to a specific industry or organization, that funding agency may influence the results. The relationship will vary depending on the organization involved.
3. Is the research public or proprietary? It’s hard to check numbers if their sources are confidential.
4. Has a third party confirmed the numbers? Checking third-party statements can end speculation.

Don’t Trust Statistics

The SmartPlanet article advocates “reading the small print” and “doing the math.” While checking details is important, there are some baseline assumptions energy reporters should understand before digging into the numbers.

1. Economic calculation methods, especially discounting, can be deceptive. Financially savvy experts can adjust discount rates easily to show environmentally friendly investments are impractical. Discount rates can make renewable energy or smart grid investment appear worthless because of the time it takes to recoup the money. Would the next generation agree? I doubt it. Discount rates are a way to account for short-term thinking; this doesn’t mean they are a gold standard which we should use to make all of our decisions.
2. Many energy programs lack effective outreach and marketing. According to Dan Ariely’s comments at the Behavior, Energy and Climate Change conference in 2009, telling customers that they will save a tiny monthly amount on their electricity bills may be much less effective than telling them your company has already donated to charity in their name. The lack of social science in program outreach may mean that programs underestimate the savings they could achieve.
3. There’s a large margin of error in estimates of fossil fuel resources. For example, some organizations will say peak oil has already passed us by. Other organizations allow much more time. Typically, in evaluating how much of a fossil fuel is present underground, companies and even government organizations will not have exact numbers for your story. If someone quotes a precise number, be skeptical.
4. Statistics may not include the amount of time and money involved in transitioning to a new technology. If you hear a “before vs. after” comparison without an estimate of the transition cost, pay attention. Companies do evaluate these costs internally, but they rarely become sound bytes. For example, if a company is considering a new nuclear power plant, the cost of insuring the plant should be part of the decision.
5. Experts may omit the social and environmental cost of an energy choice. Energy experts who focus on some questions – such as availability of oil or changes in electric rates – may never mention the local environmental impacts of oil production, the cost to society of air pollution and global warming, and other effects they did not quantify. The insurance industry is concerned about global warming for a reason; these “externalities” are real expenses.

Critical thinking matters in energy journalism. Many of these assumptions and credibility issues are subtle. One can’t expect reporters to view discount rates or oil reserve estimates cautiously. I hope this post will point other writers in the right direction.

P.S. All of the opinions here are my own and are based on my experience working with science news and energy data.

The Smart Grid’s Grassroots Appeal

The phrase “smart grid” might intimidate some audiences. Do we want an intelligent power grid? For some people, the idea might be reminiscent of The Matrix or even 1984. Utility customers may say that futuristic plus costly does not equal appealing.

Defined simply, a smart grid is a modernized, efficient system of power equipment that is responsive to customer energy needs. It’s flexible and decentralized and supports local installations of renewable energy.

A smart grid could reduce power losses due to electrical resistance, but consumer resistance could still pose a problem. Fortunately, one of the main advantages of a smart grid is that it can support local self-sufficiency and sustainable energy choices. It also offers the opportunity to streamline our use of electric power. The cost isn’t trivial, but neither are the benefits. If you’re interested in charging an electric vehicle in your back yard, selling wind power back to your electric company, or saving energy to reduce global warming, the smart grid can be your ally.

The face of the smart grid doesn't have to be forbidding. Credit: somadjinn. Source: Stock.xchng.

It’s important to present smart grid programs as attractive to local stakeholders rather than giving the impression they are a top-down imposition. Smart metering programs have already suffered from a lack of customer-friendly communication. Because some customers believe smart meters benefit utilities more than consumers, programs have met with resistance.

Given the potential savings and autonomy that smart grid technology can provide, it would be disappointing if this technology was portrayed as a burden to utility customers rather than a new and versatile asset.

The Powerpuff Approach to Energy Efficiency

The Powerpuff Girls have decided to take on an energy efficiency challenge. Well… not exactly. I’m sorry to say there won’t be an episode showing the Powerpuff Girls breaking light bulbs and replacing them with CFLs.

Fortunately, since the Powerpuff Girls are busy taking leaps in the air instead of promoting eco-friendly behavior, a California nonprofit, Zilowatt, is designing energy conservation education for grade school students. The New York Times profiled the program recently. The article featured the superhero graphic below.

Zilowatt's superheroes (Source: Zilowatt's website)

This image implies that the grade school students are Powerpuff-like superheroes – saving electric power and having fun at the same time. This group of kids of varying ethnic backgrounds and appearances is using energy for positive purposes.

SmartMeme and Adbusters take a similar approach to existing ads and media frames – except that they dismantle their messages instead of building on them.

Although entertainment-based education isn’t new to social marketers, approaches like Zilowatt’s are relatively unusual. Of course, saving energy is a serious process and should never be adulterated by using humor, putting cute stickers on CFL boxes, or writing tongue-in-cheek blog posts about social marketing.

An Alternative Perspective on Green Jobs

As I hear public conversations about green jobs programs, I find it puzzling that so little attention has been paid to marketing these programs to trainees, businesses and unions.

Regardless of conservative spin, green jobs are a win-win solution to many social issues. If conservatives want to get tough on crime, reduce drug abuse, improve social cohesion in low-income neighborhoods, and practice the bootstrap approach they advocate, supporting green jobs programs is a logical response. The costs of incarceration and poverty are very high.

Let’s take a look at the source of the stigma green jobs programs face. These programs have, from the start, been framed as a socialist solution to capitalist problems. I find it disturbing that these programs – which, ideally, could support businesses, unions, and low-income populations – are being labeled socialist at all.

There is nothing socialist about green jobs programs. These programs support capitalist production and employment. Their structure is, if anything, economically conservative. They direct resources toward educating potential employees and giving them the skills they need to succeed in the workforce.

The only excuse I can see to reduce support for these programs is racial bias. I believe the idea of hiring minority and working-class employees has been used to intimidate many potential allies of green jobs programs.

Businesses stand to gain substantially from green jobs training. In fields where there is a shortage of workers, there is no reason qualified employees shouldn’t step in to fill the gap. This is classic capitalism – supply and demand. There is nothing socialist about this approach.

The only “socialist” part of green jobs training is the fact that some public and private resources are redirected to prepare new employees for work. Currently, college tuitions are skyrocketing in the United States. Expecting lower-to-middle-class young people to fork over a large amount of their future pay to gain job qualifications is not realistic. College dropout rates are related to students’ after-school commitments. I documented the effect of part-time jobs on Latino college students for the PoliMemos project.

The picture that emerges from these facts is far different from the media spin. I see large numbers of people who have the initiative and entrepreneurial potential to succeed and improve their neighborhoods, but who are held back by lack of resources and lack of access to social networks.

Let me make this clear – it is social capital and money that holds green jobs trainees back, not lack of ambition. It surprises me that I haven’t seen any social scientists step up to the plate to challenge this damaging media message.

One can design effective green jobs programs by listening to audiences, including businesses. In the aftermath of the recession, this approach is essential. This is not a luxury. This is a bread-and-butter, capitalist solution to severe social problems.

The only reason I can give for the resistance I see is a lack of awareness that these are ambitious young people who deserve a chance to shine. We may not be able to get them all of the resources their peers can access, but at least we should give them job training.

I saw a rock carving in Gloucester, Massachusetts a while ago which said, “When work stops, values decay.” This is not a radical idea. Although I don’t know about changes in values, I do know unemployment leads to depression and a host of other social ills. What surprises me is that so many people are unable to see that their tax dollars also support prisons and drug treatment programs. These dollars could be sending young people to college.

To the extent that green jobs programs are ineffective, it is because they lack the investment, messaging and coalition building to make their promise a reality. Like Obama’s “hope” slogan, these programs cannot deliver without work.

I’d like to see people put their shoulders to the wheel and make a solid effort to back up the promise of the American dream.

Note: All of the statements here are based on conclusions I reached independently. None of these views reflect the perspectives of any of my employers – past, present or future. I am willing to provide additional information to support any of these statements.

Social Marketing and Energy Efficiency

In 2010 and 2009, I developed two reports on behavior change for the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

The first report, an overview of advanced metering programs, demonstrated that user-friendly technology can make it easier for homeowners and businesses to save energy. It emphasized technology rather than motivation.

In the second report, I took a more in-depth look at the gears that move behavior change. Why do we choose to save energy?

Many groups rely on environmental and economic motivations to get results. While these benefits do matter to audiences, emphasizing them can lead nonprofits and businesses to overlook the value of social marketing.

If you buy an iPhone, the odds are that you didn’t make that choice to save money. The iPhone may make your life more convenient. It may be fun to use. It might even improve your social life. Motivations like these – the nuts and bolts of social marketing – are absent from many conversations about saving energy.

Audiences who have a DIY ethic may find it satisfying to save energy. However, this group is only part of the population. For the rest of us – the ones who want to be talking with our friends online, checking our calendars, or playing solitaire – saving energy can also be satisfying. But to tap into this potential, we need to move beyond talking about money and the environment. We should ask questions and innovate.

Visualizing Energy Efficiency

In 2009, I wrote a post called “The Invisible Hand of Plastic.” But energy efficiency is much less visible than plastic.

Energy efficiency's invisibility makes it more difficult to promote than renewable energy.

Although software developers find creative ways to show customers how saving energy works, sometimes a visual analogy can change audience perspectives.

This video from the Minnesota Energy Challenge says wasting energy is like letting a faucet drip. The message is simple, but was based on market research. You can also see how the video uses numbers to show potential savings.