RedFlow has had a small sales presence in the USA for all of 2011 and has participated in numerous industry conferences there. The company’s first zinc [...]]]>

“2012 will  be my 3rd invitation [...]]]> Jane Capital Partner Neal Dikeman to speak at the 11th Wall Street Green Summit in New York City on March 19-20, 2012.  Located at the Center of Architecture, the WSGS is the longest running and most comprehensive environmental market event in the industry launched in 2002 by Peter Fusaro.

“2012 will  be my 3rd invitation to speak at WSGS.  It’s one of the anchor conferences in the cleantech sector, ” says Neal Dikeman.

The Wall Street Green Summit XI is the “one-stop shop” to come up to speed on the latest developments in Green Trading and Finance.

• Renewable Energy Finance
• Smart Grid Opportunities
• Greening Buildings
• Insights into Carbon Trading & Finance
• Green Hedge Fund Strategies
• Cleantech Investment Today
• California Carbon Market for 2012
• New Green Investment Opportunities

The CleanTech Showcase is one of the largest [...]]]> Jane Capital Partner Neal Dikeman was invited to Keynote the 5th Annual CleanTech Showcase in Sacramento, on October 24, in an one-on-one interview with power industry veteran and CleanStart Chairman, Gary Simon, on the subject of “Accelerating the Growth of Clean Tech: Insights from a Veteran”.

The CleanTech Showcase is one of the largest dedicated cleantech conferences in the country, and is put on every year by the CleanStart program of the Sacramento Area Technology Alliance.

HOUSTON, August 9, 2011 American Electric Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: AETI), today announced the appointment of Neal Dikeman to the company’s board of directors. AETI is a leading global provider of power delivery solutions for the traditional and renewable energy industries.

Neal Dikeman is a [...]]]> Neal Dikeman to further accelerate AETI’s renewable energy and M&A initiatives

HOUSTON, August 9, 2011 American Electric Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: AETI), today announced the appointment of Neal Dikeman to the company’s board of directors. AETI is a leading global provider of power delivery solutions for the traditional and renewable energy industries.

Neal Dikeman is a founding partner of Jane Capital Partners, a San Francisco-based, corporate advisory and merchant banking firm focused on clean technology and alternative energy investments.

Dikeman cofounded and was instrumental in launching five cleantech and alternative energy industry firms. Among them, Dikeman advised state-owned Meridian Energy Ltd on its entry into the solar sector, leading to the launch of its solar IPP business and the commissioning of the first utility scale photovoltaic solar electricity plant to connect to the California Independent System Operator’s (CAISO) transmission grid under California’s Renewable Portfolio Standards program. Dikeman and his firm also cofounded Zenergy Power plc, a leader in high temperature superconductor technology and utility-scale grid protection devices.

“Neal’s background in renewable energy, coupled with his expertise in mergers and acquisitions, and investment banking, will be invaluable to AETI as we accelerate our renewable energy initiatives,” said Charles Dauber, AETI Chief Executive Officer and President.

Dikeman is currently a director of Smart Wire Grid, Inc. and Carbonflow. He is chairman of Greenhome LLC, the original online ecostore. He has served as alternative energy advisor to a number of multinational companies.

Dikeman is also chief blogger and founder of CleanTechBlog.com, the premier website for commentary on clean technologies, carbon trading, alternative energy, smartgrid, and the green economy.

“AETI has leveraged its 65 years of traditional energy experience to create what I think is a utility-scale solar industry game-changer – the industry’s first 1000 Volt, 1MW integrated solar inversion station known as ISIS™,” said Dikeman. “I look forward to helping the AETI team accelerate their renewable business growth.”

Prior to Jane Capital, Dikeman headed mergers and acquisitions at Globalgate, Inc., an ecommerce holding company and parent company of Yellowpages.com. He was also an associate at Doyle & Boissiere LLC, a private equity firm focused on manufacturing turnarounds.

Dikeman began his career with the energy group of Bankers Trust working on M&A and financing projects in the oil and gas and energy service sectors. He holds a B.A degree from Texas A&M University.

American Electric Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: AETI) is a leading global supplier of power delivery solutions to the traditional and renewable energy industries. AETI offers M&I Electric™ power distribution and control products, electrical services, and E&I construction services, as well as American Access Technologies zone enclosures, and Omega Metals custom fabrication services. South Coast Electric Systems LLC, a subsidiary, services Gulf Coast marine and vessel customers.

AETI is headquartered in Houston and has global sales, support, and manufacturing operations in Beaumont, TX, Keystone Heights, FL,. and Bay St. Louis, MS. In addition, AETI has joint venture interests located in Xian, China; Macae, Brazil; and Singapore. AETI’s SEC filings, news and product/service information are available at http://www.aeti.com.

Forward Looking Statements
Except for the historical and present factual information contained herein, the matters set forth in this document, including statements regarding the anticipated results of our international joint ventures are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. There are many risks, uncertainties and other factors that can prevent the achievement of our goals or cause results to differ from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements including, without limitation, the risks inherent in doing business outside of the U.S. such as political, social and economic instability, currency fluctuations and conversion restrictions. These and other risks which may impact management’s expectations are described in greater detail in filings made by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company assumes no obligation to publicly update or revise its forward-looking statements even if experience or future events make it clear that any of the anticipated results expressed or implied herein will not be realized.

The Board of Zenergy, a leading developer of superconducting technology, announces that it has completed a review of the Group’s business and strategic options which involved the Group’s main business lines and an assessment of the long term viability of the Group’s overall strategy.

The Company has created a [...]]]> Press Release from Zenergy Power llc

The Board of Zenergy, a leading developer of superconducting technology, announces that it has completed a review of the Group’s business and strategic options which involved the Group’s main business lines and an assessment of the long term viability of the Group’s overall strategy.

The Company has created a patented portfolio of IP in the area of High Temperature Superconductivity (“HTS”) which has been incorporated into a number of industrial power applications which have achieved significant firsts in their respective markets. These included the first industrial HTS product, the Magnetic Billet Heater, and the first HTS Fault Current Limiter installed in the US electrical grid. These achievements and the interest they have generated coupled with trends in the energy sector, such as the shift towards “smart grids”, have led the Board to conclude that there is significant value in the Group’s superconductor technology solutions.

HTS Wire (2G)

The Company’s HTS wire process offers the potential to reduce significantly the cost of HTS wire production through the use of a continuous chemical process which, when scaled-up, can deliver industrial quantities of wire at low cost, thus facilitating and stimulating the adoption of superconducting equipment generally.

The Board previously announced that the investment required to scale-up the technology to commercialisation is too great for Zenergy to fund on its own.

Fault Current Limiter (“FCL”)

The Board believes that the FCL product has a large long term potential market and is part of the transition to “smart grids” and distributed power generation. However, it is the Board’s view that it is likely to be a number of years before FCL will have achieved significant market penetration. Furthermore, the FCL is a specialist component of the Transmission and Distribution (T&D) equipment market and as such would benefit from the greater resources of a larger T&D equipment supplier.

Magnetic Billet Heaters (“MBH”)

Sales of MBH have been at lower volumes and on a significantly more protracted timescale than the Board had originally hoped. Whilst this business may in due course cover its costs and make a contribution towards central costs, the Board has concluded that it will not be of sufficient scale to be the main driver of Zenergy’s growth.

Generators and motors

The Company has also developed and supplied superconducting coils for use in generators and motors, where it has engaged with potentially interested industry players in wind, hydro and marine propulsion.

The funding required to finance Zenergy through the period of commercialising its technology would be substantial and there can be no certainty that the Group would be able to secure such funding.

The Board has, therefore, concluded that Zenergy’s business can best be developed as part of a larger group with access to the necessary funding and commercial relationships to enable commercialisation of Zenergy’s unique IP and products. Accordingly, the Board has appointed Matrix Corporate Capital LLP and Woodside Capital Partners to seek a purchaser for the Group. As a result, the Company has entered into an offer period for the purposes of the Takeover Code.

Following recent changes to the composition of the Board, the Panel on Takeovers and Mergers has confirmed that it considers Zenergy’s place of central management and control to be in the United Kingdom. Accordingly, Zenergy is now subject to the provisions of the Takeover Code.

In accordance with Rule 2.10 of the Code, Zenergy confirms that it has in issue and admitted to trading on AIM 69,059,368 ordinary shares of 1p each under International Securities Identification Number GB00B19HBR28.

Zenergy will make a further announcement in due course, as appropriate.

Enquires: Stephen Mischler · Matrix Corporate Capital LLP · T + 44 20 3206 7203 Mike Powell · Woodside Capital Partners (UK) LLP · T + 44 208 144 5139

Disclosure requirements of the Takeover Code (the “Code”)

Under Rule 8.3(a) of the Code, any person who is interested in 1% or more of any class of relevant securities of an offeree company or of any paper offeror (being any offeror other than an offeror in respect of which it has been announced that its offer is, or is likely to be, solely in cash) must make an Opening Position Disclosure following the commencement of the offer period and, if later, following the announcement in which any paper offeror is first identified. An Opening Position Disclosure must contain details of the person‘s interests and short positions in, and rights to subscribe for, any relevant securities of each of (i) the offeree company and (ii) any paper offeror(s). An Opening Position Disclosure by a person to whom Rule 8.3(a) applies must be made by no later than 3.30 pm (London time) on the 10th business day following the commencement of the offer period and, if appropriate, by no later than 3.30 pm (London time) on the 10th business day following the announcement in which any paper offeror is first identified. Relevant persons who deal in the relevant securities of the offeree company or of a paper offeror prior to the deadline for making an Opening Position Disclosure must instead make a Dealing Disclosure.

Under Rule 8.3(b) of the Code, any person who is, or becomes, interested in 1% or more of any class of relevant securities of the offeree company or of any paper offeror must make a Dealing Disclosure if the person deals in any relevant securities of the offeree company or of any paper offeror. A Dealing Disclosure must contain details of the dealing concerned and of the person‘s interests and short positions in, and rights to subscribe for, any relevant securities of each of (i) the offeree company and (ii) any paper offeror, save to the extent that these details have previously been disclosed under Rule 8. A Dealing Disclosure by a person to whom Rule 8.3(b) applies must be made by no later than 3.30 pm (London time) on the business day following the date of the relevant dealing. If two or more persons act together pursuant to an agreement or understanding, whether formal or informal, to acquire or control an interest in relevant securities of an offeree company or a paper offeror, they will be deemed to be a single person for the purpose of Rule 8.3.

Opening Position Disclosures must also be made by the offeree company and by any offeror and Dealing Disclosures must also be made by the offeree company, by any offeror and by any persons acting in concert with any of them (see Rules 8.1, 8.2 and 8.4). Details of the offeree and offeror companies in respect of whose relevant securities Opening Position Disclosures and Dealing Disclosures must be made can be found in the Disclosure Table on the Takeover Panel‘s website at www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk, including details of the number of relevant securities in issue, when the offer period commenced and when any offeror was first identified. If you are in any doubt as to whether you are required to make an Opening Position Disclosure or a Dealing Disclosure, you should contact the Panel‘s Market Surveillance Unit on +44 (0)20 7638 0129.

Greentech Media and Groom Energy have partnered to create a critical new symposium series, Enterprise Carbon Accounting. Building on the success of Groom Energy’s previous seminar held in Boston February 25 this year, this event will answer the major questions facing large corporations and institutions today around carbon accounting.

The solar industry remains a bright spot in a down economy. But while the field continues to grow, the rate of progress may be slowing as the credit crunch and technological difficulties blunt the effect of government subsidies, industry sources say.

A layoff announced last week by Hayward's OptiSolar Inc. highlighted [...]]]> by Tom Abate, SF Chronicle

The solar industry remains a bright spot in a down economy. But while the field continues to grow, the rate of progress may be slowing as the credit crunch and technological difficulties blunt the effect of government subsidies, industry sources say.

A layoff announced last week by Hayward's OptiSolar Inc. highlighted some of the issues facing the sector. The local company, which builds power-plant-size solar arrays, blamed the 290 job cuts on trouble securing financing. Industry observers said its troubles also reflect the challenges of moving new technologies from the lab to the field.

"The Silicon Valley plants are now coming to the proof of principle point," said Neal Dikeman, a founder at Jane Capital Partners, an energy investment firm in San Francisco. "Everyone has simply underestimated how difficult this is."

As the new Obama administration pegs its job-creation hopes on industries like solar, the question is not whether the field will grow, but whether it will grow faster or slower – and with what subsidies.

Last year, Congress enriched and extended a 30 percent federal tax credit on solar installations. California, which adds another 15 to 20 percent in incentives on top of that, has seen solar installations soar, according to California Public Utilities Commission analyst Molly Tirpak Sterkel.

"We have continued to see strong, in fact record, installations in California despite the economic conditions, and we are optimistic that it will continue in 2009," she said.

But industry sources say the nationwide market, while still growing, is growing slower.

Ron Pernick, with the market research firm Clean Edge, said solar installers are still hiring but at a slower pace in part because of the credit crunch and a wait-and-see attitude about government incentives.

"Until we get clarity from the Obama administration and the credit markets loosen up, it's going to be real hard for some of these solar outfits," Pernick said.

'Financing is a problem'

Barry Cinnamon, chief executive of Akeena Solar in Los Gatos, said his firm's solar installation business has slowed from a growth rate above 40 percent to something more in the 25 to 30 percent range. He hopes that falling prices for solar arrays, coupled with more generous federal tax incentives, will re-energize orders.

"The economics of solar have never been better," Cinnamon said. "But financing is a problem. They can't borrow money to put in the system."

Financial analyst Jesse Pichel, who follows the solar industry for Piper Jaffray, said all three segments of the installation marketplace are feeling the credit pinch to varying degrees. The residential sector must contend with plunging home equity and declining consumer confidence. Corporate buyers are leery of the capital expenditures required to put in huge arrays. The third solar market is for industrial-scale installations to sell power to utilities, and Pichel said it faces the largest financial and technical hurdles.

Focus on current contracts

OptiSolar falls into this last category. The Hayward firm says it will focus on completing current contracts, including a 550-megawatt solar plant for PG&E in San Luis Obispo. A PG&E spokeswoman said the utility remains confident OptiSolar will hit the project's Dec. 31, 2010, deadline. That deal is one of about 40 contracts PG&E has made with alternative energy suppliers to meet a state-imposed requirement that it get more than 20 percent of future power from renewable sources.

To spur installations nationwide, the solar industry wants Congress and President Barack Obama's administration to sweeten the new federal tax incentives.

Rhone Resch, president of the Solar Energy Industries Association, argues that tax credits work only when consumers and businesses pay taxes. With the recession hitting paychecks and profits, he says tax liabilities will shrink, making credits less appealing. He wants the 30 percent credit to be refundable, so even if buyers do not pay taxes on the installation, they could still get the benefit.

In a press conference after Obama's stimulus speech, Resch said solar companies have been talking about layoffs in the industry's 80,000-person workforce. He said the goal of creating 165,000 new jobs by 2011 would be jeopardized unless "these tax credits are improved."

Pichel, the financial analyst, said European countries have driven solar installations using a different strategy, promising to pay certain prices for solar-generated power. That has created large markets in countries such as Germany, Spain, Italy and Greece. Pichel said Europe now accounts for about 80 percent of global solar demand versus close to 10 percent for the United States.

"Solar continues to be an industry driven by subsidies," he said.

E-mail Tom Abate at tabate@sfchronicle.com.

Original Article.

Cleantech Open is the largest cleantech business competition, featuring 18 semi-finalists from 5 regions around the country, and $250,000 in prizes.

In America’s fast-growing and complex world of carbon footprint reporting, the spreadsheet is still king. But sophisticated software solutions are starting to crop [...]]]> Even without carbon legislation, software to help companies count emissions is starting to roll out.

Companies that get power from coal-fired plants have yet another source of emissions to count.

In America’s fast-growing and complex world of carbon footprint reporting, the spreadsheet is still king. But sophisticated software solutions are starting to crop up to replace manual data entry, and no one questions that they are the future. While the U.S. Congress continues to debate cap and trade, federal and state regulations and pressure from the investment community mean greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting is increasingly being tied to financial reports.

Companies are hunting for the standout tracking tool that can do the heavy lifting.  Observers say the integrity of emissions trading markets will depend on it.

“As emissions reporting evolves and companies are able to increase sophistication for reporting, they are realizing that spreadsheet calculation … is not sufficient and can lead to errors,” says Eric Israel, head of U.S. climate change and sustainability services at accounting firm KPMG.

Writing on the wall

Starting in early 2011, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will require more than 30 industry sectors to collect annual emissions in the first federal mandatory greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting system. The rule covers about 85 percent to 90 percent of U.S. climate pollution.

At the same time, the Western Climate Initiative (WCI), a group of seven western states and three Canadian provinces, plans to mandate carbon accounting for its coming cap-and-trade pact; the scheme is set to go live in early 2012, according to a detailed plan released by the initiative in July. Currently, California; New Mexico; Quebec, Ontario; and British Columbia are completing their regulations, representing 70 percent of the region’s GHG emissions.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has been pulling together provisions for a state-only carbon trading market to meet the Global Warming Solutions Act (AB32) which aims to cap emissions at 1990 levels by 2020. The state’s largest polluters began reporting emissions in 2009 because of the law.

These are just the most far-reaching regulatory systems on the books.

The Obama administration may soon force government contractors to track GHG output or lose contracts under a General Services Administration plan. And in a step that could accelerate reporting among businesses, the Securities and Exchange Commission says it is planning to require U.S. corporations to assess and reveal the effects of climate change on their financial health.

Across North America, more than 400 firms are now reporting to The Climate Registry (TCR), a nonprofit collaboration based in California that runs a central repository for reporting GHG emissions. Last year, more than half of U.S. Fortune 500 firms revealed their emissions through the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), a London-based global climate change reporting system. In April, Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) added CDP’s carbon disclosure ratings to the “key stats and metrics” section of its Finance search results, adding pressure for improved reporting.

With all this proof that GHG reporting is becoming important to investors, analysts agree that current collection tools do not match the complexity of the task.

“The core of the reporting is a guy and a meter and a spreadsheet,” says Neal Dikeman, a partner at merchant bank Jane Capital Partners and chairman of CarbonFlow, a software firm that verifies carbon offset projects. “We’re struggling just to get the spreadsheets up and posted and accurate. …Very, very little of it is actually being done in software.”

Dikeman, says that’s about to change.

2/2 ページ

Even without carbon legislation, software to help companies count emissions is starting to roll out.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coal_power_plant_Knepper_1.jpg

Beyond spreadsheets

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (NYSE: PCG), California’s largest utility, has been reporting emissions since 2002 to voluntary reporting programs, and to CARB since 2009.

“To date, we’ve done everything through spreadsheets … and everything is essentially in Excel,” says Robert Parkhust, manager of climate protection and analysis at PG&E.

But the complexity of reporting is forcing the firm to quit last decade’s data solutions. PG&E “is starting to evaluate an IT solution,” Parkhurst says. And while the number of companies that are getting into the space “has grown quite substantially in the past year,” none are able to cater to its full emissions management needs, he adds.

So far, more than 50 major software players and startups offer carbon management software, according to a January report by Groom Energy Solutions. The sector saw $46 million in venture capital investment in 2009. By 2011, the market is expected to leap 600 percent and include 800 product providers, according to the study.

“There are not a lot of software solutions that we’ve seen that are focused on the utility industry, either from a California perspective or a U.S. perspective,” Parkhurst says.

Still, PG&E is test driving some potential game changers. “This is a journey for us,” he says.

In June 2010, PG&E announced a partnership with the University of California, Berkeley to pilot software by California-based startup Climate Earth that calculates the environmental footprint of the utility’s supply chain, or its “Scope 3” emissions.

Climate Earth, founded in 2008, is the brain child of Chris Erickson, a former Fortune 500 executive. Its software inputs thousands of line item purchases, measures their environmental impacts and churns out sophisticated reports on carbon, water, toxins and waste.

There is “no data entry, no installation and no staff required for the customer,” Erickson says.

Clients get monthly automated updates while they crunch their financials. It is a “full supply-chain analysis that is integrated with the financial system,” says Erickson, and “no one else is doing this.”

Most of what Climate Earth aims to do is help companies bolster their bottom lines. Erickson says his product might help companies see the carbon intensity of their least profitable products or calculate the risk of a potential oil price spike.

In that way, the software moves carbon accounting out of the corporate social responsibility group and into the executive office (see “CSR takes a walk down Wall Street,” Sustainable Industries, May 2010). “That’s vital if we’re going to build a sustainable economy,” Erickson says.

Data dilemma

Monitoring of Scope 3 emissions may be the future of carbon tracking, but direct emissions are its present. PG&E is testing the Climate Registry’s online reporting software for the electric industry, the Climate Registry Information System 3.0 (or CRIS).

Its developer, British software giant Misys, is a major player in tech solutions for banking and healthcare. The firm’s reporting platform keeps tracks of GHG inventories for the registry’s users, converts raw data on fuel use and other sources into carbon dioxide equivalents and produces comprehensive reports.

But it’s not just a calculator, says Graham Sands, the firm’s senior director of global technology. “There’s a whole workflow engine behind it that involves verification bodies and reporting to different agencies.”

“As the area of GHG reporting is rapidly evolving, this tool represents progress in GHG reporting functionality,” Parkhurst says.

For Misys, the key to its solution is that it’s highly flexible and configurable. The software “can evolve as the market matures” and “makes it very, very easy to get data into the registry systems,” says Sands.

The reason for this is that regulations remain wildly in flux.

“It’s really hard to build software until you know what has to be reported,” Dikeman of Jane Partners says. Each regulatory and voluntary scheme has different levels and qualities for what needs to be reported. “Companies are struggling with how to sort that out,” he says.

The collapse of efforts to pass a federal cap-and-trade pact this year adds another complication. That “is the single biggest obstacle … to bringing solutions to market,” Sands says. “When you don’t know the end game it’s hard to build a good software.”

But should Congress ultimately pass sweeping greenhouse gas regulation, Misys will be ready, Sands asserts.

Trillion dollar experiment

While U.S. climate policy is sorted out, the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS), already 200 times the size of RGGI, is the scene of most of the action.

But Dikeman notes that once there is full rollout of the EPA, CARB and WCI—on top of the next phase of the EU-ETS—carbon regulation will touch just about every major energy and industrial company in the world.

“It will be huge,” he says. “And they’re not going to do that without a lot of software.”

For his part, Dikeman imagines a future emissions reporting regime that will have electronic verification of “everything”—from the “meter all the way through to the documentation in a real-time basis.”

The shift is “happening now, it just takes time,” Dikeman says. The entire reporting system is “a half a trillion dollar experiment” in how to “design rules that will fight climate change at serious scale without causing economic collateral damage that we can’t handle,” he adds. “It’s a pilot – it’s not supposed to be right or perfect.”

* Greenhome.com’s ecostore is the market leader for online sales of green and environmental products
* The acquisition provides Green Home with capital to grow, and expand its green business efforts, including its offerings of compostables and green cleaning supplies
* Online [...]]]> Jane Capital Partners LLC Acquires Leading Green Ecommerce Company Greenhome.com

* Greenhome.com’s ecostore is the market leader for online sales of green and environmental products
* The acquisition provides Green Home with capital to grow, and expand its green business efforts, including its offerings of compostables and green cleaning supplies
* Online sales of green products have grown at double digit rates since 2005 and are expected to more than quadruple by 2020

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif – Oct. 12, 2010 –Jane Capital Partners LLC, http://www.janecapital.com/, an alternative energy and cleantech merchant bank, announced today the acquisition of green ecommerce pioneer Greenhome.com, http://www.greenhome.com/. San Francisco-based Green Home is the original online “ecostore,” now carrying thousands of green products for both the green home and green business.

“Our research shows Greenhome.com is the premier green e-tailing platform and one of the most respected green retail brands,” said Jane Capital managing partner Jane Lindner. Added Neal Dikeman, a founding partner of Jane Capital: “To reach business and consumer customers, the explosion of new clean technologies and new green products needs a way to market – a way the customer can trust. We believe Greenhome.com is that way.”

Started as just an idea in his garage by environmentalist Lawrence Axil Comras in 1999, Greenhome.com has sold millions of dollars of green products, has introduced some of the most successful green products to the consumer market including the transparent chlorine removing shower filter, and enjoys the top ranking on all search engines for “green products” and “environmental products.” Green Home was the first retailer to develop and insist upon using a rigorous green ratings methodology for all products sold. Green Home originator Mr. Comras is widely recognized as one of the creators of the term “greening,” and has been featured in radio and TV including The Today Show, CBS News, Fox News, and also in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.
Mr. Comras said, “Since 1999 I have worked to build Greenhome.com in ecommerce, but also drive practical use of rigorous green product standards into the market. Jane Capital has an appreciation and commitment to both strong standards and pragmatic environmentalism, and the resources and vision to continue to grow Greenhome.com.”

###

About Jane Capital Partners LLC

Jane Capital is a leading merchant bank in the cleantech sector, located in San Francisco and Houston, which has funded or founded multiple cleantech spin-offs, and advised multinational energy companies on alternative energy. Jane Capital operates Cleantech.org, CleantechBlog.com, cofounded Carbonflow and Zenergy Power, helped found the solar business of Meridian Energy Ltd. of New Zealand and advised them on the acquisition of solar IPP Cleantech America.
About Green Home, Inc.

Headquartered in San Francisco, CA, Green Home, Inc. is a privately held company. Since 1999, its principal product has been Greenhome.com, which has grown to become the premier online resource for consumers interested in environmentally conscious living. Green Home provides products and information that promote a healthier, more ecologically sound home environment. Green Home was founded and is majority owned by CEO and eco-pioneer Lawrence Axil Comras, a leading speaker on sustainability and widely recognized expert in the field of greening.

Media Contacts:

Jane Lindner
415-282-6400
jane@greenhome.com

Lawrence Axil Comras
415-237-6400
lawrence@greenhome.com

The countdown has ended, and years of near-silence are coming to an end Wednesday as venture-backedBloom Energy unveils its much-anticipated fuel cell at a big media event at eBay offices in San Jose, Calif.

The buzz around Bloom Energy has reached a fever pitch. It’s no wonder: The 8-year-old company represents Kleiner [...]]]>

Neil Budde joined DailyMe.com, a media and technology company specializing in personalization, after nearly 30 years of print and online news experience. He [...]]]> Investorideas.com has created a “Think Tank” comprised of some of the industry’s best to provide insight into current and future trends in their areas of expertise

Neil Budde – Media

Neil Budde 

Neil Budde joined DailyMe.com, a media and technology company specializing in personalization, after nearly 30 years of print and online news experience. He was founding editor and publisher of The Wall Street Journal Online and later vice president and editor in chief at Yahoo! News, Finance and Sports. His career began as an editor and/or reporter at The Richmond Times-Dispatch, The Louisville Courier-Journal, and USA Today. Budde earned a bachelor痴 degree in journalism from Western Kentucky University and an MBA from the University of Louisville. He sits on the boards of the Online News Association, the News Literacy Project and the First Amendment Coalition.

Neil Berlant – Water

Neil Berlant 

Fund Manager of the PFW Water Fund – Since 1968, Neil has been continuously involved in the investment banking industry, either as a principal, officer, or founder of several firms. He has supervised and initiated the publication of numerous investment research reports on the water industry and conducted conferences directed towards top corporate management, the investment community, and venture capitalists. He has been a speaker at conferences on topics ranging from financing, to business and investment opportunities in the water industry. In addition, he has consulted to Fortune 500 companies and participated in negotiations concerning mergers, acquisitions, and venture capital investments. He is quoted frequently in newspapers including the Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Investor’s Business Daily, and many others.

Neal Dikeman- Cleantech

Neal Dikeman 

Neal Dikeman is one of the founding partners of Jane Capital Partners LLC, an energy and technology merchant bank whose clients have included the technology arms of multinational energy companies. He is Chairman of Carbonflow, his fourth startup, and the third he has helped launch cross-border. He previously cofounded SC Power Systems, Inc. and its successor Zenergy Power plc (AIM:ZEN) in superconductor technology, helped launch WaiterPad POS Systems, Inc. in wireless hospitality POS solutions, and led the spin-out of Fideris, Inc. in fuel cell test & measurement. He has served as a director of several technology companies, edits the Cleantech Blog, named one of the 50 Best Business Blogs by London Times, and chairs Cleantech.org. He previously served as Director of Business Development for Globalgate, the parent company of Yellowpages.com, and as an associate at private equity fund manager Doyle & Boissiere. Before entering private equity, he began his career in energy investment banking at Bankers Trust, and has a B.A. from Texas A&M University.

Karl Miller- Energy

Karl Miller 

Mr. Miller is a globally recognized energy executive and institutional investor with a balance of both financial and energy sector expertise. Mr. Miller began his career on Wall Street during the 1980s and has an extensive background in banking, commodities trading and risk management.

Mr. Miller is acclaimed for multiple ground breaking market calls and investments, including the U.K switching from a net gas exporter to a net gas importer in 2000, called the California energy crisis in 2001,called the Ethanol and Bio diesel boom and bust in 2007, called the renewable energy boom and bust cycle underway in 2008, and most recently called the revival of natural gas in the United States in 2009.

Mr. Miller has a long history in the global energy business and has held a variety of executive management positions both within the United States, Europe and Asia. Mr. Miller has bid on over $25 billion in energy related assets during his career.

Mr. Miller has built, restructured and managed energy businesses for major public energy companies on several continents, including PG&E Corporation, Electricite de France, El Paso Energy, Enron Corporation and JPMorgan Chase.

Mr. Miller holds an MBA in Finance from the Kenan-Flagler Business School at The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Mr. Miller also holds a B.A. in Accounting from Catholic University located in Washington DC.

J. Peter Lynch – Solar

J. Peter Lynch 

Mr. Lynch has worked, for 33 years as a Wall Street security analyst, an investment banker and a private investor in small emerging technology companies. He has been actively involved in following developments in the renewable energy sector since 1977 and is regarded as an expert in this field. During this time he assisted a number of renewable energy companies with private placements and public offerings in the 1980′s, 1990′s and 2000′s and has raised over $600MM for renewable energy companies in the areas of: Photovoltaics, Solar Thermal, Wind and Biomass.

He was the contributing editor for 17 years to the Photovoltaic Insider Report, the first publication in Photovoltaics (PV) that was directed at industrial subscribers, such as major energy companies, utilities and governments around the world.

Jonathan B. Smith

Jonathan B. Smith 

Jonathan B. Smith is a President & CFO at Wave Dispersion Technologies, Inc.
(“WDT”), The Global Leader in Maritime Homeland Port Security Barrier & Buoy Protection Systems. He is responsible for all of WDT痴 finance, marketing and government affairs activities. He has been actively involved in the Homeland Security field for over 10 years and has extensive security international security experience.

Prior to joining WDT, he worked at several investment banking firms including JP Morgan & Co., Deutsche Bank, and accounting firm Arthur Andersen, LLP. While working in the investment banking field, he was actively involved in various strategic planning, treasury and financing roles.

He is an expert in Internet marketing strategy and is a recognized expert on the subject. He has utilized these skills to market WDT’s products on a global basis. He is also the editor of the Maritime Homeland Security and Force Protection Blog. In addition, he has used his Internet skills to give back to the community, raising over $500,000 online for deserving charities, since 2002.

He is a graduate of Michigan State University (Homeland Security Certificate Program), Wesleyan University (BA Social Studies), and the University of Hartford (MS Accounting).

Mitchell Manoff- Investment Banking/Finance

Mitchell Manoff 

Mitchell Manoff is the co-founder of Corinthian Partners LLC a 13 year old New York based Investment Banking/Asset Management firm. Prior to founding Corinthian he spent 14 years at Lehman Brothers.

The sectors that he focuses on in the corporate finance devision are alternative energy and digital media. Recently he helped arrange financing for 2 of Ontario, Canada’s largest wind farm, over 225 mega watts. Among his internet successes were Edgetrade and Vault, sold to strategic and financial investors respectively. He also is in charge of the firm’s wealth management division, which services family offices, institutional and high net worth customers.

Mr Manoff co-manages the firm’s partnerships with The Hatchery, a New York based venture collaborator and SecondMarket a platform for the buying and selling of illiquid assets. Currently he is focusing on matching successful management teams with corporate spinnoffs and turnaround opportunities.

He also teaches Venture Financing at Baruch in New York where he received his MBA. He has a B.S. in B.A. from Boston University.

In Chu We Trust? It may take big bucks from the U.S. Dept. [...]]]>

ZNEPF | Quote | Chart | News | PowerRating — Zenergy Power, a superconductor energy technology company, announced that American Electric Power ('AEP') has entered into a collaborative agreement with the Group to become the first utility company to install and operate a [...]]]>

Carbonflow, a venture dedicated to bringing automation and transparency to the carbon market, is a web-based software technology that works to drastically lower the cost and time it takes to create a carbon credit. We took some time to connect with Neal Dikeman, Co-founder and Chairman of the Board [...]]]> from Carbon Offsets Daily

Carbonflow, a venture dedicated to bringing automation and transparency to the carbon market, is a web-based software technology that works to drastically lower the cost and time it takes to create a carbon credit. We took some time to connect with Neal Dikeman, Co-founder and Chairman of the Board of Carbonflow, to learn a bit more about this revolutionary product.

COD: How does Carbonflow help developers of GHG reduction projects?

Neal: We built this platform with the help of the major DOEs, DNV and SGS as a way to solve the CDM bottleneck issues.  Basically an electronic fast track program that also happens to do your “carbon ERP” on the web.  As an industry, we are still in the early days of carbon, and we just outgrew our infrastructure.   As a result, the transaction costs, time frames, and uncertainty of developing/validating, running, monitoring, and verifying GHG reduction projects are way too high.  Carbonflow helps drive up transparency, enables developers to shorten the time frame and increase the certainty of getting projects through, and reduces the transaction costs.  In short, we allow developers to cut the cost of carbon projects.

Let’s do some simple math – carbon projects burn 1-3% per month in value, and take 2 to 4 years to get through to the first check.  Small mistakes can costs a fortune, and once you get to the monitoring and verification cycle, every day to issuance is lost cash.

And worse, carbon projects are multiparty and global by nature.  Every project involves people in multiple continents, 5 to 10 organizations, and across lots and lots of time zones.  If they each work on their own IT platforms which don’t communicate electronically (and none of them do), it’s no wonder the costs blow out.

Here’s how it works.  Carbonflow’s eRecord maintains everything known about the project, all documents, emails, data in a single electronic record.  Each party, whether it’s an asset owner, developer, consultant, buyer, Designated Operational Entity (DOE), Designated National Authority (DNA), or the UNFCCC, can access the project and put in and see their part.  As project moves through its lifecycle, the Carbonflow eRecord guides and tracks it step by step.

It operates through web and email, and sits “in the cloud”, and since everything in carbon is global, you are able to take it with you.  We then add “carbon smarts” to manage the process through validation, monitoring and verification, and roll it all up so you can see your whole portfolio at once
And of course, the software reports virtually everything that happens with the project back to you.

I believe if you’ve got 1 project or 115 projects ranging in stage from PINs to waiting on issuance, you should know exactly where everyone of your projects is, what needs to be done, and who needs to do it, at all times, whether it’s with your analyst, a pending approval by your DOE or the DNA, or waiting on a consultant report.

Imagine being able to see the status of very project you’re involved in at all times, see its performance, and click through and find every document or data item, who did it and what needs to be done next.  Carbonflow allows you to complete all that before breakfast.

COD: Does Carbonflow feature any tools to assist project developers build credibility for the compliance or voluntary market?

Neal: Absolutely.  It’s called transparency.  The only way to build credibility is to enable trust.  Similar to the way eBay blew open the online auction market with their user feedback system enabling trust, Carbonflow’s eRecord for the project enables everyone to know, when a project comes out of Carbonflow, the data is there, and the speed is there.

COD: Carbonflow recently launched a new tool, CarbonCompare(tm), which offers a large database of carbon projects using publicly available project information from UNFCCC. How do you see this tool being used?

Neal: As a corollary to the eRecord, I think everything in business works better if it’s benchmarked.  The carbon world has been using very basic benchmarks, like project performance rate.  That’s great, but it’s just the tip of the iceberg.  We take data publicly from the top CDM data analysts in the world at UNEP-Risoe and IGES who work off of UNFCCC data, plus any data you want to put in adding analysis from our own experts, and run it through our Carbon Compare engine. Pretty much Carbon Compare will let you build a series of comps, and tell you the minimum, mean, maximum and standard deviation and comparison for your project and that compute comparative stats for any variable in those data sets, plus a range of ratios that we calculate.  And it will let you take the answers and transfer the reports to excel. In many cases Carbon Compare will link directly to the underlying documents.

For example, if you are looking at a hydro project located in China and trying to assess its likelihood of meeting additionality tests, Carbon Compare can tell you in seconds whether the IRR (or a whole range of variables) you’re using is within the norm for registered projects of that type, and give you links to the PDDs and analysis spreadsheets for recently registered projects to compare it to.

As far as I’m concerned, both for very granular benchmarking and prediction of where your portfolio is in monitoring, to catching mistakes and evaluating the likelihood of additionality issues, to due diligence for a buyer, this is a must have.  We designed it with input from the Climate Change Directors and Technical Directors of the top DOEs, basically working backwards from what they’d want to see to get the validation or verification job done faster.

COD: Who would use CarbonCompare?

Neal: Pretty much anyone developing, buying, selling, validating, verifying, consulting, thinking about or touching a carbon project.  And it’s free in the beta period.  To date the only tools available have been either very high cost, or simple spreadsheets.  CarbonCompare is web 2.0, running “in the cloud” as a web based application. We’ve already got hundreds of users in the first 45 days of the beta.

COD: Once a project developer has created their carbon credits using Carbonflow, what’s their next step? Does Carbonflow support the marketing and sales side of carbon credits in some way?

Neal: We get asked this a lot.  We’re not brokers, nor are we developers, but we can certainly give you a platform to make the brokerage part easier to execute, and more transparent, just like the development part of carbon.

For example, let’s say you are looking to sell a project or tons off a project that’s in pre-registration.  What are the first questions you’ll get asked, where’s the PDD, where is it in the validation process, who is the DOE, how does it compare to other projects, etc, etc.  All that information already resides in Carbonflow and you can make it available to your customers at the push of a button.  And which future project are you going to contract a higher price per ton for?  The one from the developer that’s all electronic and lets you see status in your email every morning, or the other one?

We do have plans to roll out more functionality to support marketers, buyers, brokers and developers, and have had many discussions on partnering with traders and exchanges.  So watch this space.

COD: In a Sustainable Industries column (06/30/08 “Putting carbon offsets in their place”) you wrote that carbon offsets “drive the carbon out of the economy in the cheapest possible manner.” Yet, carbon offsets continue to receive a good deal of criticism in the media and mainstream seems wary. What’s the bottom line, are carbon offsets a useful tool or not?

Neal: Definitely.  To be clear, fighting climate change takes a range of policies.  Offsets are one weapon in the arsenal. One of the huge hidden dangers of climate change policy is unequal prices of carbon in the economy, which can cause economic collateral damage.  Basically, if my region or industry has a higher price of carbon than other areas, production will flow to that other area, unless I can buy my carbon from that area, which offsets effectively permit, equalizing the price.

In addition, our policies should be catalyzing fast, large, cheap and early action on climate change.  Since cap and trade takes years to get up and running, and years more to enact across all sectors and regions (think China), we need a path to get started, and to keep pressure on the regulated industries.  Offsets, provide an excellent mechanism to mobilize the private sector capital and people to find the biggest and worst offending GHG externalities, and smash them with hammer first.  Cap and trade without offsets does not do that.  One can argue that the biggest areas of concern in Clean Development Mechanism offsets were the massive industrial gas projects in Asia, where some carbon project developers made a ton (no pun intended) of money.  Critics complain that looks like “climate profiteering”.  And there’s some truth to the concerns over good validation.  But in fact, that’s cap and trade working to a “T”.   The largest, most egregious, cheapest to reduce GHG abatements happened first and fast, because of the carbon offsets, even in the markets like China that may be regulated last.  That’s exactly what we want our policy to do.

The other big concern is speed. Without offsets, climate abatement generally would get backended to the end of the early commitment periods.  Offsets drive carbon projects early in the process, and keep the pressure up on carbon regulated companies by enabling immediate and lasting competition to find the lowest cost ton.

I’d argue anyone against offsets either doesn’t understand economics or trade, or is really trying to argue for a high price of carbon – which you and I will pay for.

COD: What will Carbonflow be doing in five years from now?

Neal: Hopefully launching a suite of new products, working on taking the cost of carbon abatement to <$10/ton, and the scale of abatement to billions of tons per year.

Our mission statement is simple:  help cut the cost of carbon abatement and save the world.

To learn more visit the Carbonflow.com