MIT Energy Conference Influences National Legislation

A fun note for a Friday: The MIT Energy Conference, which I covered in March here, here, and here was cited by US Senator Jeff Bingaman when he introduced Supply Star Act of 2010, a bill designed to bring about energy-efficiency improvements in supply chains, much like Energy Star has done for appliances.

The Senator indicated that the idea for the bill came from this year's MIT Energy Conference, where he and his staff were particularly influenced by a panel discussion titled, "Supply Chain Energy Use: Exposing Opportunities for Innovation in a Global Economy. (link to video)"

Bingaman specifically mentioned the MIT conference, saying that the hurdles surrounding optimization of supply-chain energy consumption "were discussed in some detail by an expert panel. The hurdles include a lack of information and analysis tools for important parts of far-flung supply chains, which often lie far upstream or downstream (and therefore out of sight) of a particular firm, as well as a lack of leverage with which to drive global suppliers toward more efficient practices."

The bill, Bingaman said, is aimed at helping to address this lack of tools and information.

Kudos to the student organizers of the energy conference for making an impact.

For more information: Student-run MIT Energy Conference influences national legislation

Industry Reps at MIT Energy Conference: Give Us a Price on Carbon

The message from industry leaders attending the MIT Energy Conference this weekend is clear: "Give us a clear price on carbon."

John Rowe, CEO of Exelon, has long been a proponent of cap-and-trade.

He reiterated this support this morning in his opening keynote, saying he felt "a bit like Elizabeth Taylor's eighth husband: I know the drill, but I'm not sure how to make it interesting."

Rowe is not so enthusiastic about our ability to reduce emissions through increasing deployment of renewables, at least not at current prices and efficiencies.

"Our work shows you can do some things with renewable energy standards," Rowe told the audience. "But you don't want to bet the farm on your picks."

Rowe secretly prefers a carbon tax, telling the audience, "Every six months I call Rohm Emmanuel and ask him if it's time yet to try a carbon tax." But he knows that it just won't happen.

Still, Rowe asserts, "We need lower carbon energy. We need more secure energy. And we need to harness the market to get it, but a market that is constrained and directed."

These sentiments were echoed by just about every industry representative I've seen at the conference.

"We need a level playing field," Helene Regnell of Maersk Line, the largest container shipper in the world, told the audience gathered for a panel on "Supply Chain Energy Use. "We need standardized, strong international regulation on carbon in order to get where we need to go and how we get there."

Speaking on the same panel, PepsiCo International's David Walker concurred, adding that 80 percent of his company's carbon footprint comes from outside the company itself.

It is hard to operate internationally with cumbersome, often conflicting regulations that differ from country to country.

The answer, at least from industry's perspective, is a clear price on carbon.

"We have to use the market to get to a $20-30 per ton price on carbon," Exelon's Rowe said. "And that means cap-and-trade or a tax. We can do a lot with carbon at $20-30 a ton."