The first global consumer label that identifies a product made from wind power.

I am composing this blog post on a computer that was likely assembled in a factory that runs on electricity made from coal. The aluminum for the case and other parts of the computer probably came from a smelter powered by natural gas. The electricity powering the computer here in California could come from a combination of natural gas, from hydropower, wind power, or a solar thermal plant that uses the Sun’s energy to create steam, turn a turbine and make electricity. But this is educated guesswork on my part.

We can pick up a chocolate bar, coffee, or other stuff at Trader Joe’s and read the label to see where it was made, whether or not it’s organic, if the people who grew it were paid a just wage, and how much high-fructose corn syrup is involved. Doesn’t it seem like the next step is to know what kind of energy was used to make it? Soon you’ll be able to go to a store and buy a product you know was made from pure, clean wind energy.

The Global Wind Energy Council, WWF, the LEGO Group, the UN Global Compact, and others announced an initiative to create the first global consumer label that identifies a product made from wind power; they call themselves the WindMade consortium. The announcement came in late January at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland—the uber gathering of world-grade economic movers and shakers. The consortium plans to disseminate the WindMade label through what it calls a “good corporate citizen initiative” that includes 6,200 corporations in more than 130 countries.

“We hope that this will create a strong element of consumer pull which will accelerate the pace of wind energy development globally,” says Ditley Engel, CEO and President of Vestas Wind Systems, who pioneered the initiative. But it’s not just wind energy the consortium is pushing. The group wants to create labels for products made from solar energy, biomass, and other renewable sources.

The WindMade labeling initiative is a global effort to promote energy and resource conservation to corporations; but it is reaching corporations through their customers. A global TNS Gallup survey of 25,000 people in 20 different markets showed that 92% of respondents believe that renewable energy is a good way to combat global climate change, and most of them would choose a wind-made product even if they had to pay a premium for it. Corporations, at least the ones that make things, have to please their customers, as well as their shareholders, in order to compete and stay in business.

“We believe that voluntary certification is one key to raising the bar for mainstream performance,” says James Leape, Director General of WWF. “We hope to see WindMade develop into a good example of a standard for corporations to close the gag between ambition and reality in the important area of renewable energy.”

In March, the WindMade consortium plans to announce more details of the program, in particular how the certification process will work. PricewaterhouseCoopers—a member of the consortium and the folks who tally the scores and keep the Oscar winners secret until Oscar Night—is leading the effort to develop and monitor the certification process. And the winner is—everybody.

37.8686 -122.267

Proposition 7 is one of the green propositions – in more ways than one.

The amount of cash that's being spent on this so-called Big Solar initiative is prodigious. It is one of the most expensive measures on the ballot. On one side you have a little more than $5 million to pass the proposition, all from Peter Sperling, the son of the man who created the online college, The University of Phoenix. And on the other side, three utility companies have pitched in well over $27 million to defeat it.

Interestingly, the companies that stand to profit from this initiative – the many small companies that make up most of the solar and wind energy industry – are actually against the bill.

PG&E and Southern California Edison are the two biggest donors, chipping in more than $13 million apiece. To see a list of spenders, for and against proposition 7, click here.

For more on the debate, check out this discussion from KQED's Forum.

Listen to the Big Solar on the Ballot radio report online.

37.8721 -122.258

Low winter light over the town of Iqaluit,
the capitol of Nunavut,Canada. Photo by Bill Semple,
architect and senior researcher at the Canada Mortgage
and Housing Corporation.

Among home performance professionals, we also call the systemic approach, the whole house approach. For example, we think it is best to retrofit your home to make it more energy efficient before you invest in an expensive solar electric, or PV, system. You can buy a smaller PV system that way, and draw less energy from the electric grid. We think you should switch to CFL bulbs right now, buy Energy Star appliances when you need new appliances, and before the next hot summer have a home performance professional air seal your attic and add insulation. Make sure the contractor checks to see if you have proper ventilation in your home after air sealing-otherwise your gas appliances may back draft nasty things like carbon monoxide into your living spaces. Don't go out and buy new windows, no matter what the advertisers tell you, until your old windows are worn out. In other words, do it all, but when the time is right.

There is a debate going on in our country about how to solve our energy and environmental problems. Some say corn ethanol is the answer; others say it's cellulosic ethanol. Some say wind energy and some say solar energy; some say more government regulation is the answer and some say let the free market decide. These either/or approaches are wrong in my book. The more we are divided in our passion to solve our problems, the less likely we are able to solve them. The best-built homes are the ones in which all the parts-building site, building envelope, walls, foundation, attic, roof, HVAC system, appliances, lighting, and people-work in harmony and are most adaptable to change.

Tom Friedman also said in his talk at Berkeley Lab that writing in blogs about solving our energy problems is not enough. In our March/April 2008 issue of Home Energy we will publish a story about home building in the far north of Canada, within the Arctic Circle. The Inuit people who live there are already building to adapt to the climate change that is already occurring, as well as preparing for more climate change in the future. They are building homes that are culturally appropriate. They are also building in a way that will reduce as much as possible the emissions of greenhouse gases that are causing climate change. Amen to that! Amen to the systematic approach!

Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.