One of my favorite sessions from VERGE 2019 was a presentation by Amory Lovins on the expanding energy efficiency cornucopia. Among several things, he discussed the vital benefit of energy efficiency in working toward environmental sustainability through emissions reductions without harming or slowing economic growth. 

In various international climate plans, energy efficiency is increasingly prominent. In fact, more cities and the private sector are tapping into its direct economic benefits, such as job creation and its potential to improve people’s livelihoods.

The technical fixes register considerable energy savings, prevent energy waste and demonstrate there is still so much we can do to reduce pollution, especially within old existing infrastructure, such as data centers, commercial real estate and transportation systems.

In the 2019 scorecard by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), Washington, D.C., was named as one of the best cities for energy efficiency and for scaling up local generation of clean energy in the country. As a project coordinator, my day-to-day work at the District of Columbia’s Sustainable Energy Utility (DCSEU) involves supporting energy projects around the city. 

Here is my take on why the district consistently has been a leader in this domain, and what other cities can learn from it as they prioritize commitments to reserve energy for the tasks it is most needed for with the aim of attaining more — as Lovins would say — “negawatts.”

1. There’s a strong focus on buildings

Buildings are a major aspect of energy conservation because they consume nearly three-quarters of the electricity in the U.S. and represent over a third of greenhouse gas emissions. Besides the strong commitment to increasing localized generation of renewable energy from solar for the local real estate, the Clean Energy Act (CEDC) of 2018 has prioritized energy efficiency in the U.S. capital’s buildings. 

To work towards this goal, the act contains a Building Energy Performance Standard (BEPS) for commercial and multifamily buildings. Most real estate has been stratified based on a range of unique factors, such as square footage and their purpose, as these determine occupancy and energy use.

Prescriptive guidelines to reduce energy use resulting from energy audits will be shared with building operators, with requirements to improve energy performance over five years, based on localized historical baselines. Moreover, all buildings 50,000 square feet and above will need to benchmark and meet minimum efficiency standards in the first phase of new guidelines published in January.

More buildings in Washington are attaining retrofits even before these regulations take effect because operators are realizing the benefits of energy efficiency. This year, I visited the headquarters of the American Geophysical Union, one of the city’s remarkable sites for transformative energy management. It is the first to attain the net-zero standard as a retrofit building in the city. 

All components from its demolition were recycled and reclaimed as construction materials on the site. The building also generates solar from over 700 panels on-site, and its windows calibrate to let in natural light, reflect heat while keeping the indoors cool. This building is replicable model for existing building owners to close the loop on building materials while incorporating new technologies to conserve energy.

2. Energy efficiency programs are designed with people in mind

The programs in Washington have an intense focus on people’s well-being. For instance, the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and Income Qualified Efficiency Funds (IQEF) initiative are both specifically designed to upgrade energy equipment for single and multifamily buildings occupied by low-income residents. 

This is important because besides the greater comfort from improved HVAC systems and better security from improved exterior lighting, the projects reduce household energy expenditures, leaving people with more money to spend on what it more important to them. 

In healthcare facilities, where operating hours are long, the technical fixes improve air quality and create a healthier environment for patients. The George Washington University Hospital for example, has retrofitted a wide range of its buildings, by installing LED lighting, occupancy sensors through the Eco-Building Program in a multi-year Climate Action Plan. The Sibley Memorial Hospital’s recent expansion is also designed to meet LEED Silver standards, including 23,000 square feet of green roofs and “healing gardens.”

3. Washington is making it easier to quantify benefits 

The benefits of energy efficiency are often hard to quantify. Perhaps because its very nature is counterfactual — how does one measure “savings” that one never used? Nonetheless, while many of energy efficiency’s rewards are intangible, customers, regulators and the local utilities mostly know they exist, and they want these efforts to succeed. 

Some benefits can be estimated over time, as baselines are reviewed to evaluate energy consumption in buildings before and after installation of new equipment. In more prescriptive programs involving particular technical upgrades, standard rebates are derived for customers depending on the technology and the quantity of upgrades done to switch. 

4. Everyone contributes to financing efficiency

Under CEDC, all of Washington’s local rate payers contribute through a surcharge per energy billing cycle, on electricity and natural gas consumption. This fee goes into the Sustainable Energy Trust Fund (SETF) and the Energy Assistance Trust Fund (EATF), a financial reserve to facilitate energy efficiency projects around the city through rebates. Most recently, the Green Bank and the DC Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program were launched to leverage long term private investments and lower upfront costs of adopting energy efficiency and distributed energy projects using public funds.

While many of energy efficiency’s rewards are intangible, customers, regulators and the local utilities mostly know they exist, and they want these efforts to succeed.

The funds, around $20 million annually, are disbursed to the DCSEU to provide energy efficiency services and reduce per-capita energy consumption, ensure low peak electricity demand and reduce energy demand from the largest energy users (such as public transportation systems).

Beyond energy efficiency, the trust funds play a major role in financing the addition of distributed energy resources, such as community solar projects, in the city.

5. There’s transparency about the future of energy efficiency

Perhaps one of the most important outcomes of energy efficiency in the city is the steady effort to phase out inefficient equipment locally. 

The standards are higher for newer buildings to improve design. Construction codes from the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) have set new standards for what constitutes net-zero in buildings. This helps developers calculate estimated maximums Energy Use Indexes and determine combinations of prescriptive energy measures while projects are still being developed.

Lessons for other cities

Energy efficiency truly represents one of the best ways to reduce emissions in concert with other measures. Often, the technical upgrades can be achieved at low cost to consumers, yet the benefits of reducing the energy footprint of cities is worthwhile for climate action.

Cities will have more inhabitants in the future. While more economic development and increasing population in cities may mean more energy demand, energy efficiency meastures demonstrate that growth can continue while (and where) energy is saved. Moreover, energy efficiency mitigates the need to build more capital-intensive infrastructure to supply energy. Lastly, energy efficiency initiatives offer direct benefits that can improve people’s quality of life.

The beauty industry has a plastic waste problem. And it knows it. A quick Google search brings up articles from Allure, National Geographic, Forbes, Teen Vogue and 31,800,000 other results about the issue. 

It seems those concerns finally have reached a critical mass, inspiring a sustainability makeover at three of the biggest beauty brands in the business — Sephora, Natura & Co, and Ulta Beauty.

Last year, Sephora launched Clean at Sephora , a label that originally screened for 13 ingredients considered “unclean” but in July was expanded to over 50 substances, including butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), sulfates, mercury, talc, aluminum salts and lead. The company announced a partnership Aug. 17 with the Environmental Defense Fund to continue the reduction of toxic chemicals in its products. 

Sephora reported that 94 percent of its products contain no high-priority chemicals laid out by its chemical policy, and 13 percent more products on its shelves release ingredient information compared to last year. Sephora also recently took action on the racial justice issue by becoming what it believes is the first beauty company to commit to giving 15 percent of its shelf space to Black-owned brands per the 15 Percent Pledge — however, it hasn’t given a timeline for when it will complete that goal. 

Natura & Co., which recently announced its 10-year Vision 2030 sustainability plan, is prioritizing initiatives including habitat protection and reimagining its packaging. The strategy expanding preservation of the Amazon rainforest to 7.4 million acres from its current 4.5 million, having fully circular packaging by investing $100 million in developing regenerative solutions, and decreasing its greenhouse gas emissions.

Ulta Beauty also recently announced a new overarching sustainability initiative, Conscious Beauty. The program commits to elevating cruelty-free and vegan products highlighting these brands in-store.

Ulta, like Sephora, is planning a Made Without list that will tag products free of parabens, phthalates and 25 other chemical categories. Ulta also ran an advertising campaign in 2018 highlighting diversity in beauty including different races, genders and even a model in a wheelchair. In the past few years, the company has added black-owned brands such as EleVen by Venus Williams, Pattern by Tracee Ellis Ross and Juvia’s Place.

But Ulta’s marquee pledge is getting to 50 percent recycled, bio-sourced materials or refillable containers by 2025.  

According to the Ulta press release, the cosmetic industry produces 120 billion packaging units every year across the globe. And with 1,264 retail stores across 50 states, Ulta is a large contributor to this issue. Many tubes of mascara and lip gloss and tins of powder, blush and eyeshadow can’t be recycled at all. 

Loop sees an opportunity with the high-priced luxury makeup brands sold by Ulta.

“We know the packaging in beauty is a challenge,” said Dave Kimbell

ll, president of Ulta Beauty. “But we think we could be part of the solution.”

To get to that 50 percent goal, Ulta has teamed up with reusable packaging darling Loop from TerraCycle. Loop distributes products including Häagen-Dazs ice cream, Pantene shampoos and Clorox wipes in refillable containers. When customers buy the product online, they put down a deposit that is returned when the consumer mails the containers back via a designated tote. Loop already has U.S. partnerships with Kroger and Walgreens, and it is planning to offer in-store drop-off locations by the middle of next year. That’s something it also hopes to do with Ulta in the future. 

Loop sees an opportunity with the high-priced luxury makeup brands sold by Ulta that it doesn’t have with the ones sold at your neighborhood grocer or pharmacy. 

“Beauty products need to have packaging that has a beauty aspect because beauty is about beauty,” said Tom Szaky, CEO and founder of TerraCycle. “There’s this huge opportunity for epic design that is unique to the beauty category. Doing things that can’t be done when you have a cheap disposable package.” 

There’s this huge opportunity for epic design that is unique to the beauty category.

Beauty products in the 1950s came in beautiful glass, gold, silver, crystal and ceramic bottles and containers that were refillable. Since the 1960s, the amount of plastic packaging on everything, not just cosmetics, has increased 120 times. As the industry moved to disposables, cosmetic packaging designers typically prioritized more function over form. The Ulta-Loop partnership could spur a return to a previous era for the industry, the partners believe. 

“It’s going to allow packaging innovation in a way that’s never been done before,” Szaky said. “Because the beauty brands are willing to be brave and push the envelope.” 

While Loop already has a few partnerships in the cosmetic space — including with brands such as Pantene, REN and The Body Shop — Ulta is the first collaboration focused specifically on the lucrative world of makeup. 

“We’re going to really leverage the relationships and the influence that we have in the industry to help drive change as [Loop is] building their packaging and their supply chains,” Kimbell said.

Loop will use Ulta’s connections in the beauty world to create innovative new packaging designs for Ulta’s in-house brand and other consumer favorites; the exact brands have not yet been nailed down.

According to Szaky, Loop plans to tap the best and most creative designers for the project. Ulta has a unique power to pressure its vendors to take up sustainable initiatives such as this to get better placement in-store. And Loop can use Ulta’s connections to expand its own portfolio. In the end, there will be a joint website to sell the products before transiting to Ulta.com with a Loop-specific section.

“It’s going to take multiple efforts to really attack this,” Kimbell said. “There’s a packaging opportunity that we collectively have as the industry, and we think it’s important for Ulta Beauty to be a leader in helping drive it forward.”  

Sustainability leaders are architects, designers, city planners, engineers, scientists, energy experts, lawyers, nonprofit leaders and business owners.

The United Nations defines “sustainability” as meeting the needs of today without compromising the needs of the next generation to meet their own needs. In practice, much of our work centers around developing global climate change solutions to save the planet. The Black Lives Matter movement has cast a bright light on what we’ve all known for a long time: We cannot do this work effectively without fighting against white supremacy and putting racial justice at the center of sustainability. 

Sustainability also relies on local government. Despite the pain and heartbreak across the country, we have seen leaders — especially female mayors and local officials such as mayors Keisha Lance Bottoms of Atlanta, Muriel Bowser of Washington, D.C., Lori Lightfoot of Chicago, Vi Lyles of Charlotte, North Carolina, Libby Schaaf of Oakland, California and Jenny Durkan of Seattle — working in their communities to create powerful dialogues and meaningful policy action. In June, Ferguson, Missouri elected its first Black mayor, Ella Jones. 

As sustainability leaders, we must partner with these mayors to implement an anti-racist future. Whether it be renaming Black Lives Matter Plaza on 16th Street NW in Washington, D.C., or urging protestors and police to congregate peacefully, these leaders are working hard to take action on systemic racism.

Sustainability must put people at the center. But what does this actually mean?

As Bowser stated in a recent interview, her actions on 16th Street were to “send a unifying and affirming message about what this time and the reaction to the killing of George Floyd means in our country.” The image of Bowser next to the late Congressman John Lewis is a powerful testament to change, progress and hope. 

Like these other mayors, Bowser has pushed for a green and sustainable vision for her city. In 2019, Lance Bottoms and Lyles testified before Congress on Atlanta’s and Charlotte’s steps to create a more climate resilient city. Lightfoot, Schaff and Durkan also fight for sustainability in their cities daily.

From the carbon footprint of city buildings and housing to energy policy, mayors are on the front lines of sustainability. These leaders — many of whom are Black women — are standing up and also listening, and doing all they can to create a brighter future.

Yes, reforming policing is first and foremost right now. But the larger discussions about dismantling systemic racism are about how we will invest in people and communities. Sustainability is part of that necessary community investment.

Equal access to clean air, clean water, clean energy, green space and a healthy built environment is the heart of sustainability. Yet, environmental racism is real.

A recent literature review published in the Journal of American Medical Association found a statistically significant correlation between low birth rate and miscarriage in Black communities with higher temperatures from global warming and climate. Environmental justice leaders have shown time and time again the disproportionate impact of citing toxic manufacturing plants and landfill in Black, Indigeneous and people of color communities along with the devastating impacts to public health. Putting racial justice at the center of our conversations on climate solutions and design is essential. 

Sustainability is often stated as rethinking profit, people and planet. Sustainability must put people at the center. But what does this actually mean?

Designers must think about the impact of design, not just the intent. We must not only ask for feedback from communities where we work, but we need to take the feedback and change design based on their needs. Using design thinking, we must separate our intent from our impact. We also must create opportunities for BIPOC individuals to provide input and solutions for sustainability. That means investing in people — specifically, creating job opportunities for BIPOC leaders in creating solutions for a healthier, greener planet.

We can’t safeguard the planet if we can’t protect, respect and support each other. It starts with equality, and it leads to the health and resilience of people and the planet. The bold leadership of these women mayors is inspiring. It’s time for the sustainability community to honor their bravery with bold, inclusive action to create a greener and more equitable planet. 

Editor’s Note: The authors are past national winners of the Women in Sustainability Leadership Award. Their view is that the role of these local female civic leaders in sustainability and racial equity has been overlooked and that the sustainability community should embrace their efforts. Kimberly Lewis is writing in her personal capacity.

I had high hopes for microgrids this year. The cost has fallen, out-of-the-box solutions are more common and businesses and homes understand the expense of losing power. All signs pointed to this being the year of the microgrid. 

Yet here we are, at the start of the new fire season, and we’re just launching programs and soliciting proposals designed to add more resilience. What happened?

For one thing, regulation moves slowly. The California Public Utilities Commission fast-tracked a rule-making process in September to help accelerate the deployment of microgrids. With that process still underway, the regulator issued a short-term action to deploy microgrids in mid-June. You know, just a few weeks before the start of this fire season. 

It’s also tough for major utilities to gear up new technologies — and they’re juggling a lot: clean energy targets; COVID-19 complications; and in some cases, bankruptcy. Pacific Gas and Electric, California’s largest utility and the originator of 2018’s deadly Camp Fire, is simply not on track to ensure clean energy reliability. Instead, the utility is planning to deploy mobile diesel generators. This stop-gap measure is low-tech and dirty — but it should keep sections of communities online in a way that deployments of customer-sited energy assets wouldn’t.

To make matters worse, the coronavirus is slowing the deployment of microgrids. Shelter-in-place orders have delayed permitting, construction and interconnection of new projects. The first half of the year was the slowest period for microgrid deployments in four years, according to an analysis by Wood Mackenzie. 

Speeding up microgrid deployments 

Although 2020 has hit some hiccups (to put it mildly), California is well-positioned to see more microgrids soon. 

Utilities are mandated to increase energy reliability while meeting clean energy requirements, and service providers are motivated to secure major utility contracts.

The state is also working to address key barriers to accelerate deployment for customer-sited energy projects, according to Wood Mackenzie microgrid analyst Isaac Maze-Rothstein. 

Because modular microgrid components are all built primarily in factory, the construction timelines — and total system costs — can be significantly decreased.

Programs such as the California Public Utilities’ Self-Generation Incentive Program encourage more customers to install energy storage at home, and California’s SB 1339 aims to streamline interconnections, which will help bring more microgrids online and keep costs low. Additionally, more out-of-the-box microgrid solutions are coming, simplifying the whole process. 

“We are seeing the emergence of modular microgrids over the last year,” Maze-Rothstein said in an email. “Because the components are all built primarily in factory, the construction timelines — and total system costs — can be significantly decreased.” Examples include Scale Microgrid Solutions, Gridscape Solutions, Instant On and BlockEnergy.

The value of resilience 

A growing body of research is working to quantify the cost of inaction. 

We know outages — from extreme weather, natural disasters, physical attacks and cyber attacks — are becoming more frequent. And they’re expensive. Weather-related outages alone cost Americans $18 billion to $33 billion each year between 2003 and 2012, according to the Department of Energy. One of last year’s planned outages in California cost the local economy an estimated $1.8 billion.

At the same time, the technologies that would keep the lights on are maturing — and providing a potential new source of revenue. As energy assets become more interconnected and grid operators look for added flexibility, energy asset deployments look increasingly economically attractive.

Analysis from Rocky Mountain Institute modeled the economics of solar-plus-storage systems for the approximately 1 million customers affected by last year’s planned power shutoffs in California. It found that those customers would have enjoyed a combined net benefit of $1.4 billion, a calculation that takes into account the value of the energy assets’ contribution to the grid. 

In a separate report, RMI showed the falling cost of batteries coupled with better energy management technologies often make the payback period of solar-plus-storage shorter than solar alone. 

The calculations show the investments pay back faster for commercial customers, as the economic impacts of shuttering businesses are easier to quantify.

This article is adapted from GreenBiz’s newsletter Energy Weekly, running Thursdays. Subscribe here.