2010 Green Innovation Index

7/31/2019 2010 Green Innovation Index

1/72


2/72

Next 10 is aN iNdepeNdeNt NoNpartisaN orgaNizatioN that educates, eNgages aNd empowers

califorNiaNs to improve the states future.

Next 10 was fouNded iN 2003 by busiNessmaN aNd philaNthropist f. Noel perry. Next 10 is focused

oN iNNovatioN aNd the iNtersectioN betweeN the ecoNomy, the eNviroNmeNt, aNd quality of life

issues for all califorNiaNs. we provide critical data to help iNform the states efforts to

grow the ecoNomy aNd reduce global warmiNg emissioNs.

siNce 2008, Next 10 has published the California Green innovation index . the index tracks

califorNias progress iN reduciNg greeNhouse gas (ghg) emissioNs, implemeNtiNg iNNovative

public policy, geNeratiNg techNological aNd busiNess iNNovatioN, aNd growiNg busiNesses aNd

jobs that eNable the traNsformatioN to a more resource-efficieNt ecoNomy.

for more iNformatioN about the califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex , please visit us oNliNe at

www.Next10.org.

prepared by: collaborative ecoNomics

D g Hent n T any F eJ hn Me v e Dean Ch angT acey G se Matthew MesheGab e e Ha te Amy K sh m a

produced by: Next teN

F. N e Pe ySa ah Hen yMa c a E. Pe yS na B dd ah

desigNed by: cheN desigN associates

califoAVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATE

2008 38.3 MILLION1990 2008 1.4%

POPULATION


3/72

rNia Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Population Data Source: California D epartment of Finance. Economy Data Sources:Bureau of Economic Analysis; California Department of Finance. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data Sources: California Air Resources Board,California Greenhouse Gas Inventoryby Sector and Activity; California Department of Finance Carbon EconomyData Sources: California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Inventory - by Sector and Activity; Moodys Economy.com

MEETING AB 32 TARGETS

RATIO OF GHG EMISSIONS(METRIC TONS) TO GDP ($10,000)

2008 3.12020 2.0

1990 4.6

CARBON ECONOMY

2.3% AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH 2000 2008

2008 $1.8 TRILLION2008 $47,700

PER CAPITA GDP

GROSSDOMESTIC PRODUCT

(INFLATION ADJUSTED DOLLARS FOR FIRST HALF 2009)

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)is a way of measuring the size

of an economy, and is calculatedby summing the value added from

all industries in the economy.This measure can be used for a

country as well as a state, inwhich case it can also beexpressed as gross state

product (GSP).

Assembly Bill 32 was signed into Californialaw in 2006, putting into place the firstever statewide cap on global warming

pollution. AB 32 has put California at theforefront of climate change policy by

requiring the state to reduce itsgreenhouse gas (GHG) emissions

to 1990 levels by 2020.

AB 32CALIFORNIA GLOBAL WARMING

SOLUTIONS ACT OF 2006

TOTAL GHG EMISSIONS

2020 433

AB 32TARGETS

2008 12.5

PER CAPITA

GHG EMISS ION S

0.5% AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH19902008

MILLION METRIC TONS

MILLION METRIC TONS

(MILLION METRIC TONS OF CO2 EQUIVALENT)

2008 4781990 433

TOTAL GHGEMISSIONS

Gross GHG emissionsincludes fossil fuel

carbon dioxide (CO2),with electric imports and

international fuels(carbon dioxide only) and

non-carbon GHGemissions (in CO2

equivalents).


4/72

Dear Friends,I started Next 10 in 2003 as a businessperson who saw California at a crossroads, facing a multi-billion dollar budget de citand an energy cr isis. Once again, today, we are experiencing daunting economic and environmental challenges. Over theyears our research has explored the nexus of the economy and environment and the profound impact both have on ouroverall quality of life.

This third edition of the California Green Innovation Index tracks Californias history of policy and technology innovationand resulting economic and environmental gains or losses. Based on this research, we can conclude that Californias greeneconomy is one of the few areas of the economy that is growing in the current downturn. The research we present in this Index demonstrates the important contribution green innovation and clean technology investment continue to make to oureconomy. Top ndings include:

ca l i fo rNia i s a g loba l l eader iN g reeN iNN ovat ioN

California has attracted $11.6 billion in cleantech venture capital (VC) since 2006, accounting for 24 percent of totalglobal investment.

California is the top state in patent registrations in green technology, outpacing second-ranked New York by 150 patentsbetween 2007 and 2009.

In the rst ha lf of 2010, the state attracted 40 percent of global cleantech VC, exceeding the rst half of 2009 by two-and-a-half times.

ca l i fo rNia coNt iN ues to r a i se i t s eNergy p roduc t iv i t y, f r ee iNg up do l l a r s fo r bus iNesses aNdhouseho lds to speNd iN the ecoNomy, which c rea tes New jobs

Californias businesses gain the competitive edge through ef ciency gains: Between 2002 and 2007, electricityproductivity of manufacturers improved by 13 percent in California and dropped by ten percent in the rest of the nation.

As a result of ef ciency improvements, each Californian used 20 percent less energy in 2008 than in 1970 while littleprogress has been made in the rest of the country.

ca l i fo rNia s ecoNomy i s r educ iNg i t s depeN deNce oN ca rboN as to ta l emiss ioNs l eve l o ff aNd pe rcap i t a emiss ioNs d rop

For every dollar of GDP generated in 2008, the states economy required 32 percent less carbon than it did in 1990.

This years California Green Innovation Index also includes a feature that examines Cal ifornias overall business climateand a feature that delves into our growing green manufacturing sector. In completing this research we uncovered somesurprising facts. Contrary to popular assertions, even among electricity-intensive industries, new business startups inCalifornia vastly outnumber losses through closures and exits. And, California is not experiencing an exodus of businessesto other states.

By revenue, energy represents the largest industry in the world. Energy technology (ET) is emerging as the next breakouttechnology revolution. And like information technology (IT), ET is an emerging tri llion-dollar market. Californ ias world-class talent, research centers and businesses, coupled with its innovative clean energy policies uniquely position us toinvent and deploy technology and bene t as a market leader.

Heres to many more years of innovation of all kinds here in California.

Sincerely,

F. Noel PerryFounder, Next 10

2 i N Tr o D u C Ti o N


5/72

inde At A G ance 4

Ca n as Past and F t e 6

He tage Techn g ca and S c a inn vat n 6

Ca n a P cy T me ne

Ca n as G een inn vat n 11

Dashb a d ind cat s 11

The Ca b n Ec n my 12

Ene gy E c ency 18

G een Techn gy inn vat n 21

T ansp tat n 27

renewab e Ene gy 34

Feat es 39The Chang ng B s ness C mate: impacts & New opp t n t es 39

Man act ng n the C e G een Ec n my: G w ng opp t n t es ac ss the Va e Cha n

Endn tes 60

Append 61

coNteNts

3C o N T E N T S


6/724 i N D E x AT A G l A N C E

gdp & emissioNs _page 13

Relative to 1990, gross domestic product (GDP) per capita grew 26 percent while GHG emissio ns per cap ita de creased by 14 percent .

iNdex at a gl aNceThe 2010 Ca fo n a G een innovat on index p esents a se es dashb a d nd cat s that t ack changes ve t me andtw n-depth eat es:The Chang ng B s ness C mate and Man fact ng n the Co e G een Economy.The inde at aG ance h gh ghts key a eas deta ed n th s ep t.

carboN ecoNomy _page 14

For every dollar o GDP generated in 2008, Cali ornia requires 32 percent lesscarbon than in 1990.

eNergy product ivi ty _page 18

Energy productivity, measured as the ratio o energy consumed (inputs) to GDP(economic output), is 68 percent higher in Cali ornia than in the rest o thenation. Cali ornias energy productivity is also improving at a aster rate than therest o the country.

8 0

1 0 0

1 3 0

1990 200 8

GDP PER CAPITA

GROSS GHG EMISSIONS PER CAPITA

ghg emissioNs _page 12

Gross annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have climbed 15 percentsince 1996 and have been leveling out since 2001.

vmt & emissioNs _page 30

Both vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita and sur ace transportationemissions per capita have declined steadily, in part a result o the economicrecession and spikes in uel prices. From 2007 to 2008, VMT per capitadropped by three percent, while sur ace emissions ell by six percent.

perceNt chaNge 20072008

vmt per capi ta -3%

s u rf ac e t r aN s po rt at i oN gh g e mi ss i oN s p er ca pi ta - 6%

as a result of eNergy efficieNcy policies

eNacted siNce the 1970s, califorNias eNergy

productivity coNtiNues to rise. this meaNs that

dollars busiNesses aNd households do Not speNd

oN eNergy caN be reiNvested iN the ecoNomy

through capital upgrades or New employees.

across all sectors, vast opportuNities exist

for New efficieNcy gaiNs.

califorNias ecoNomy is reduciNg its reliaNce oN carboN as total emissioNs level off aNd per capita

emissioNs drop.

0

2 0 0

1990 2008

REST OF THE U.S .

CALIFORNIA

01990 200 8

CARBON FREE=0 0

2 0 0

4 0 0

1990 2 008

m m t c o 2 e

1 0 0 =

1 9 9 0

g h g / g d p

g d p / b t u


7/7252 0 1 0 c a l i f o r n i a g r e e n i n n o v at i o n i n d e x

greeN tech pateNts _page 25

Cali ornia accounted or 39 percent o all solar patents registered in the U.S.rom 2007 to 2009, compared with 24 percent between 1995 and 1997.

solar capaci ty _page 35

New solar capacity in Cali ornia has grown by 14 percent since 2008 and by morethan fve-times since 2007. This growth is directly related to the Cali ornia Solar Initiative o ering rebates to consumers and the Renewables Port olio Standard.

greeN maNufacturiNg _page 50as of jaNuary 2008

Nearly 21 percent o Cali ornias green employment is in manu acturing. Acrossall industries, manu acturing represents only 11 percent o employment.

0

8 0

, 0 0 0

200 7 20 08 2 009

11 % 21 %

GREEN ECONOMY TOTAL ECONOMY

eNergy coNsumptioN _page 19

On a per capita basis, Cali ornians have been consuming less energy over thelong-term. Energy consumption per capita has dropped 20 percent since 1970in Cali ornia, while little progress has been made in the rest o the nation.

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

197 0 20 08CALIFORNIA

REST OF THE U.S .

cleaNtech vc _page 21

Cleantech accounts or a large and growing portion o total venture capital (VC)in the state. In 2009, 25 percent o total VC investment was rom cleantech, up

rom 13 percent two years earlier. Cleantech investment in the irst hal o 2010 was two and a hal times greater than the i rst hal o 2009.

electr ici ty product ivi ty _page 45

Cali ornias manu acturers have increased their electricity productivityby 13 percent since 2002, while productivity dropped by ten percent or manu acturers in the rest o the nation.

eveN duriNg the curreNt ecoNomic dowNturN,

iNvestmeNt is stroNg iN cleaN techNology,

aNd New value is beiNg created through

iNNovatioN iN techNology aNd public policy.

0

5 0

1992 1997 200 2 200 7

CA

REST

OF US

5 %

1999 2 009

2 5 %

reNewables _page 35

Since 2002, renewable energy has represented roughly 11 percent o totalenergy generation in Cali ornia. In the United States, renewables have increased

rom two to three percent. Cali ornias Renewables Port olio Standard mandatedthat 20 percent o the states electricity comes rom renewable sources by 2010and has been raised to 33 percent by 2020.

S O L A R E N E R G Y

B AT T E R I E S

W I N D E N E R G Y

F U E L C E L L S

H Y B R I D S Y S T E M S

E N E R G Y I N F R A S T R U C T U R E

G E O T H E R M A L E N E R G Y

H Y D R O P O W E R

0% 40%

0 %

1 2 %

2 002 2008

US

CA

% o

f t o t a l c a v c

1 0 0 =

1 9 7 0

ca % of u.s. pateNts 20072009

% o f

e N e r g y g e N e r a t i o N

f r o m r e N e w a b l e s

k

i N s t a l l e d

g d p / e l e c t r i c i t y p u r c h a s e s


8/726 C A l i F o r N i A S PAS T A N D F u Tu r E

cal i forNias pas t aNd future

Ca n a has a h st y c tt ng edge c t a changeand techn g ca advance. T date, th s h st y s epeat ngtse n the ea m g een nn vat n. The states p nee ng

sp t s e ed n pa t by ts w d-c ass esea ch anddeve pment ta ent, p ecedent sett ng p b c p cy, and

wa d- k ng p p at n.

her i tage of t echNologica laNd soc ia l iNNovat ioN

The Ca n a e pe ence dem nst ates that ed c ng

g eenh se gas (GHG) em ss ns can be ach eved wh e a sg w ng the ec n my. A debate that p ts the env nmentaga nst the g w ng ec n my s a a se p p s t n.Ec n m c p spe ty has been ach eved wh e p tect ng

m ted nat a es ces.

inn vat n b eaks d wn ba e s and c eates new va e. inde t ea ze b th, a ed ct n GHG em ss ns and

ec n m c g wth, Ca n a w need t b d n ts t ad t n nn vat n. Th gh mp v ng e c enc es, we can d

m e w th ess. By gene at ng ess waste and p t n,we can spend ess n c st y m t gat n e ts . By th nk ngc eat ve y, we can ea n h w t d th ngs d e ent y. By

nvest ng n techn g ca advance, the dep yment newtechn gy and p act ces, and n ta ent base, Ca n aw ema n a w d eade n g een nn vat n.

A virtuous cycle o green innovation deve ps th gh theact ns nd v d a act s and the nte act ns betweenact s. Each act has c nt ve a ce ta n sc pe act n.Each dec s n, whethe a p cy, p chase p d ct n

ss e, w have an mpact n the sc pe act n an theg p act s. As ne act n t gge s an the , m ment m

g ws, and the nn vat n p cess s sp ed. When act nsa e a gned a nd sha ed g a s g w ng the ec n my anded c ng negat ve env nmenta mpacts, then a v t s

cyc e g een nn vat n deve ps.

Sp ng Ca n as g een nn vat n demands thec nce ted e ts m t p e act s.

Government ad pts p cy nn vat ns, wh ch c eate anenv nment that enc ages b th p vate sect and

nd v d a nn vat n. At the same t me, g ve nment p cys nf enced by the eme gence new techn g es,

p d cts, and b s ness p act ces n the ma ketp ace, wh chdem nst ate what c d be p ss b e n a a ge sca e.

E ected c a s a s p s e p cy nn vat ns n esp nset g w ng c nce ns m the p b c nte ests shaped by themed a, c ns me e pe ence, and pe s na va es as m chas by g ve nment n mat n and ncent ves.

Private sector businesses esp nd t g ve nment mandatesand ncent ves, b t a s t g ba ma ket ces ( ke the p ce

). B s nesses p s e nn vat ns t meet eme g ngnd st y and c ns me demand new g een p d cts and

p act ces. These nn vat ns n t n y he p the b tt m ne Ca n a b s nesses, b t a s c eate j bs, he p n m

p cy, and change nd v d a behav by e ng tang b e

app cat ns g een nn vat n.The private sector also includes a diverse mix o non-pro it

groups that p m te changes n g ve nment p cy, b s nessp act ces, and nd v d a behav s. Th s ndependent sect

gan zat ns s an mp tant cata yst g een nn vat

Individuals n t n y esp nd t g ve nment ncent ves andava ab ty new p d cts, b t a s nf ence the d ect n

p cy th gh the p t ca p cess, and gene ate demand new g een p d cts n the ma ketp ace.

Ca n a has a he tage t a b az ng p nee s, c eat vep b em-s ve s, td enth s asts and w d-c assb s nesses that shake p the stat s q . Ca n as he tage

s nded n wa d- k ng pe p e wh a e pen t t y ngnew th ngs. Th s s what nn vat n s ab t , and th s s whatw d ve ec n m c p spe ty n the new c nte t g bac mate change and d m n sh ng nat a es ces.

PERFORMANCE

GREENHOUSEGAS EMISSIONS

ECONOMY:JOBS, INCOME

I N N O V A T I O N

I N N

O V A

T I

O N I N

N O

V A T

I O N

POLICY

STANDARDS

INCENTIVES

PRIVATESECTOR

INVESTMENT

BUSINESS

PEOPLE

ATTITUDES

BEHAVIORS



ca l i fo rNia po l icy t imel iNe

F ve seventy yea s, Ca n a has been a nat na eaden p cy nn vat n e ated t the env nment. The states

st eg s at ve andma k came n 1947 w th the c eat n the l s Ange es A P t n C nt D st ct. Th s b d

step t wa d c eane a n l s Ange es was n t n y thest g een p cy n Ca n a, b t the st ts k nd n the

nat n. ove the ne t ew decades, Ca n a c nt n ed tp s e g een eg s at n and was p pe ed t the e nt

the env nmenta p cy m vement by the ene gy c s s the 1970s. T c mbat the h ghe ene gy c sts ca sed

by the oPEC o Emba g n 1973, the Ca n a Ene gyC mm ss n (CEC) was estab shed and mp ementeda se es ene gy p c es a med at nc eas ng ene gye c ency and we ng c sts. The st maj eg s at vep cy t th s e ect n b th Ca n a and the nat n

was the Ene gy E c ency Standa ds res dent a andN n es dent a B d ngs, wh ch c eated g ndb eak ngene gy standa ds app ances and b d ngs.

M e ecent y, the state has been aced by the cha engesp sed by the Ca n a Ene gy C s s 2000 and 2001 andc mate change. in the ea y yea s the decade, awmake swe e ga van zed nt act n by ene gy sh tages and theens ng ng b ack ts. Th s enewed ded cat n has s ncsn wba ed w th the nc eased nde stand ng the dange s

c mate change, ead ng the State t pass sc es g eenp c es a med at sec ng Ca n as t e. res t ng p

nn vat ns have emb aced e tens ve ene gy e c encycampa gns, g eenh se gas em ss ns standa ds, enewab e

ene gy ncent ves, and techn gy esea ch nvestments.

1947

1955

1959

1963 1965

1967

1970 1973

1974

1976

1977

National Air PollutionControl Act Clean Air Act

National EmissionsStandards Act

Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act

Air Quality Act

EnvironmentalProtection Agencycreated by PresidentialExecutive Order

OPEC OilEmbargo

Lawrence BerkeleyLaboratorys Center for Building Scienceestablished

Clean Water Act

Statistical model illustrat-ing energy-savings potentialthrough building efficiencyreleased to public to becomebasis for building standards

California Motor Vehicle Pollution ControlBoard created to testautomobile emissionsand set standards

California Air ResourcesBoard established

CA EnergyCommissioncreated

E fciency standardsor appliances

(Title 20)

Los Angeles Air Pollution ControlDistrict created

C

A

U S

First in US



1978

1980

1982

1 986 19 87

Comprehensive Envi-ronmental Response,Compensation, and LiabilityAct (CERCLA) created theSuperfund program

Efficiency standards for appliances in FL, KS, NY

Efficiency standardsfor appliances inMassachusetts

National ApplianceEnergy Conservation andEfficiency Act (NAECA)

Emergency Planningand Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRKA)

E fciency standards ornew buildings (Title 24)

Cali ornia PublicUtilities Commissionorders removal ofnancial barriersto utilities & energye fciency investments

1989

Montreal Protocolon ozone-depletingchemicals implemented

1990

Clean Air Act Amend-ments set new autoemissions standards,low-sul ur gas, requiredBest Available ControlTechnology (BACT) ortoxins, reduction in CFCs

1997

California Energy Com-missions Public InterestEnergy Research (PIER)program established

2000

California energycrisis (2000-01)

California ClimateAction Registryestablished (S.B. 1771 )

Legislature approves10-year, $7 billion utilitysector investments inenergy efficiency,renewables, andtechnology R&D

Oregon Public UtilitiesCommission orders removalof financial barriers toutilities & energy efficiencyinvestments

Flex YourPowerinitiated

California Climate ActionRegistry is mandated(S.B. 812)

CA Renewable Port olioStandard (RPS)

Cali ornia sets standardsor emissions o CO2 &

other greenhouse gasesrom autos and light duty

trucks (A.B. 1493)

2001 2002

Recent policy innovations include the ollowing:

Under a new energy e fciency law, Energy E fciency :Equity, Jobs and Green Buildings (A.B. 758) , b d ngs nCa n a w bec me m e ene gy e c ent and ess c st yt pe ate. The CEC w estab sh a c mp ehens ve p ant nc ease ene gy sav ngs n es dent a and c mme c ab d ngs b t be e c ent b d ng standa ds. A eq est

p p sa was e eased n J ne 16, 2010 a techn cas pp t c nt act t ass st w th the deve pment and

mp ementat n the p g ams that w sat s y the beq ements. S ty-n ne pe cent h mes t date n

Ca n a we e b t be e the st ene gy standa ds and

w be a a ge pa t the c s the CECs e ts t

nc ease ene gy e c enc es and sav ngs. Acc d ng t a2005 CEC ep t, c ns me s can save $4.5 b n th ghene gy sav ng meas es n e ect c ty and nat a gas.1

With the passage o a new sustainable energy bill, TheCali ornia Solar Surplus Act o 2009 (A.B. 920) , c st me sw s n be e mb sed e cess ene gy they p d ce

m s a ph t v ta c and sma w nd systems. As Jan a y 1, 2011, ene gy c mpan es w c mpensatec st me s ene gy they send back nt the p weg d. C ent y, the e a e 50,000 h mes and b s nesses

n Ca n a w th s a ph t v ta c systems that w



Idaho Public UtilitiesCommission orders removalof financial barriers toutilities & energy efficiencyinvestments

Govenors West CoastGlobal Warming Initiative(CA, OR, WA)

Film Release: Who killedthe electric car?, AnInconvenient Truth

Governors Green BuildingInitiative executive order (S-20-04)

Western RegionalClimate Action Initiative

California Energy Com-mission adopts energyefficiency standards for general purpose lighting

California IndependentSystem Operator approvesthe Location ConstrainedResource Interconnection,a new financing tool thatimproves grid access for new clean energy projects

Cali ornia GlobalWarming SolutionsAct o 2006 (A.B. 32)

Cali ornia greenhousegas per ormancestandards or powerplants (S.B. 1368)

CA Solar Initiative

Governor Schwarzenegger executive order set green-house gas emission reductiontargets (S-3-05)

Utah, Manitoba & BritishColumbia join GovernorsWest Coast GlobalWarming Initiative

Commonwealth ofMassachusetts v.EnvironmentalProtection Agency

California Public UtilitiesCommission approvesincentives for investor owned utilities in meetingenergy savings goal

Solar Water Heating andEfficiency Act of 2007 isestablished with a goal ofinstalling 200,000 solar water heaters by 2017(A.B. 1470)

California RenewableEnergy TransmissionInitiative is formed

California requires electricutilities to record energyconsumption data for allnonresidential buildings towhich they provide service

Building owners will berequired to share the datawith prospective buyersand leasers (A.B. 1103)

Maryland Public UtilitiesCommission orders removalof financial barriers toutilities & energy efficiencyinvestments

2003

2004 2005 2006 2007

e pe ence g eate ene gy sav ngs and he p p sh Ca n a

t wa d the 33 pe cent enewab e ene gy g a s G ve nSchwa zenegge . Th s new aw dem nst ates h w thep e at n c ean techn gy p v des ec n m c et nswh e ach ev ng we em ss ns.

High reporting compliance under A.B. 32 (the Ca n aG ba Wa m ng S t ns Act 2006) was ep ted bythe Ca n a A res ce B a d. As N vembe , 591 the 605 ac t es that em t at east 25,000 met c t ns ca b n d de pe yea have ep ted the GHG em ss ns

2008. Ca n as A.B. 32 p t nt p ace the st evestatew de cap n g ba wa m ng p t n eq ng thestate t ed ce ts GHG em ss ns t 1990 eve s by 2020.

Accreditation is now available or third party pro essionals

to veri y emissions n an e t t beg n t ack ng em ss nsed ct ns nde a cap-and-t ade eg at y system. Th s

st- n-the-nat n p g am s nvest ng n the w k cedeve pment needed n de pe p e t ga n the newsk s n w demanded by c mpan es t meet the new

eg at y eq ements.

Cali ornias Renewable Port olio Standard Program was amended n Septembe 2009 by an e ec t ve de

m G ve n A n d Schwa zenegge , nc eas ng thepe centage p we gene at n m enewab e ene gys ces m 20 pe cent t 33 pe cent by 2020. G ve nA n d Schwa zenegge had ss ed a n n-b nd ng de nN vembe 2008.

California Public UtilitiesCommission approvesfeed-in tariff to incentivizethe development of small-scale solar installations(A.B. 1969)

California EnergyCommission revises Title24 to add new energyefficiency measures

California Air Resources

Board releases A.B. 32Draft Scoping Plan

Cali ornia adoptsgreen building codes

California adopts solar loan law (A.B. 811)

2008



California Air ResourcesBoard finalizes regula-tion of Palvey Bill for greenhouse gas emissionsfor passenger vehicles

GHG reduction targetsset for S.B. 375 land-usestrategies for 18 regions.Targets for 2020 and2035 integrate landuse, housing andtransportation planning

Air Resources Board raisesRPS from 20% to 33%by 2020

California launches CaliforniaGreen Corps using $10 millionin stimulus funds, providinggreen sector jobs for at-risk young adults

Green Innovation Challenge

Grant program to invest$20 million trainingworkers for jobs incleantech industries

California Air ResourcesBoard announces compli-ance rate of 97 percent inreporting of greenhouse asemissions by States 600largest facilities

California Air ResourcesBoard accredits thirdparty professionals toverify greenhouse gasemissions

The California EnergyCommission set the worldsmost rigorous efficiencystandards for televisions,cutting electricity needsfor new flat-panel sets byabout 50%

California increases feed-intariff caps (S.B. 32)

Cali ornia utilities mustreimburse customers

or excess powergenerated rom solarand wind powersystems (A.B. 920)

Cali ornia EnergyCommission to establishregulation to increasebuilding energy e fciencyand lower operationcosts (A.B. 758)

U.S. Department ofEnergy announces $30million for energy-efficienthousing partnerships

U.S. Department of Energyimplements guaranteedloan solicitation for renewable energymanufacturing projects

United Nations ClimateChange Con erence inCopenhagen, Denmark

Clean technology taxincentives included inAmerican Recovery andReinvestment Act. U.S.now on pace to doublerenewable manufacturingcapacity by 2012U.S. Department of

the Treasury andDepartment of Energyto award $550 millionfor clean energy grants

EPA proposal to reduceemissions on largeindustrial projects

U.S. Department of Energyto provide $8 billion ofloans for renewableenergy projects

Cap-and-Trade bill passesU.S. Senate Environmentand Public Works Committee(S.B. 1733)

California Air ResourcesBoard adopts regulationto reduce carbon intensityof transportation fuel 10percent by 2020

California grantedwaiver from EPA for more stringent vehicleemission standards

California receives $49.6million of stimulus dollars

to improve energy ef-ficiency, reducing carbondioxide emissions by22,541 tons and creating500 jobs

Advanced ResearchProjects Agency-Energyreceives $400 million tofund cross-disciplenaryenergy research

U.S. Department of Labor to award $500 million for green jobs initiatives

EPA will adopt morestringent tailpiperules modeled a terthose o Cali ornias

Green Collar Jobs Councilestablished (A.B. 3018)

California Public UtilitiesCommission adopts theCalifornia Long-TermEnergy Efficiency StrategicPlan for 2009 to 2020

Cali ornia Air ResourcesBoard adopts plan toreduce greenhouse gasemissions levels to1990 level by 2020

Land use strategyrequirements mandatedto reduce GHG emissions(S.B. 375)

2008 2009 2010

Cali ornia was granted a waiver rom the U.S . EPA in

June 2009 t p s e st cte veh c e em ss ns standa ds,st t ned n a 2004 aw that ca ed ed ct ns

GHG em ss ns by ca s and ght t cks 22 pe cent by2012 and 30 pe cent by 2016. The u.S. Env nmentaP tect n Agency and Depa tment T ansp tat nad pted veh c e standa ds n Ap 2010 m de ed a teCa n as eg at ns.

The Cali ornia Green Corps, created by GovernorSchwarzenegger , a nched a p t p g am n Ma ch 2009tak ng advantage $10 m n n ede a ec n m cst m s nd ng m the u.S. Depa tment lab n

add t n t $10 m n m p b c-p vate pa tne sh ps.

The p g am g a s t deve p the g een w k ce nCa n a and p v de va ab e j b pp t n t es t at-

sk y ng ad ts between the ages 16 and 24. TheCa n a C ean Ene gy W k ce T a n ng P g am haseme ged m the Ca n a G een C ps.

The Cali ornia Energy Commission set the worlds mostrigorous e fciency standards or televisions in November

2009 (e ect ve n 2010), c t t ng the e ect c ty needs new fatpane sets by ab t 50 pe cent.


13/72112 0 1 0 C Al i F o r N i A G r E E N i N N o VATi o N i N D E x

trackiNg califorNias progress iN greeN iNNovatioN illustrates how well the state is

maiNtaiNiNg its pacesetter positioN aNd iNdicates New paths emergiNg iN areas of greeN

iNNovatioN. the dashboard iNdicators that follow measure progress iN eNviroNmeNtal quality,

resource efficieNcy, aNd techNological advaNcemeNts, aNd are statistically measurable over

time. followiNg the dashboard iNdicators are two features that delve iNto deeper detail:

califorNias chaNgiNg busiNess climate aNd maNufacturiNg iN the greeN ecoNomy.

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

dashboard iNdicators

califorNias ecoNomy is reduciNg its reliaNce oN carboN as total emissioNs level off aNd per

capita emissioNs drop. as a result of pioNeeriNg eNergy efficieNcy policies eNacted siNce the

1970s, eNergy productivity coNtiNues to rise, which meaNs that busiNesses aNd households get

more for their eNergy dollars aNd therefore have dollars to speNd iN the ecoNomy oN capital

upgrades or hiriNg New employees. eveN duriNg the curreNt ecoNomic dowNturN, veNture capital

iNvestmeNt is stroNg iN cleaN techNology, aNd New value is beiNg created through the adoptioN

of New techNologies aNd public policy iNNovatioN. the dashboard iNdicators track the states

progress iN the areas of the carboN ecoNomy, eNergy efficieNcy, greeN techNology iNNovatioN,

traNsportatioN, aNd reNewable eNergy.


14/7212 D A S H B o A r D i N D i C ATo r S

Ca n as ec n my s a ge y dependent n ca b n-based ene gy. Ca b n-based e s d ve d st b t nnetw ks cean sh pp ng, a ca g , t a ns and t cks.And ca b n-based e s a e the bas s e ect c tygene at n. in de t meet the env nmenta g a s a d

t by the Ca n a G ba Wa m ng S t ns Act(A.B. 32) and the eg s at n, ec n my m stt ans t n away m ts dependence n ca b n.

The nd cat s e at ng t the Ca b n Ec n my t ackth s necessa y sh t . They he p st ate the e at nsh pbetween ec n m c pe mance ( .e., g ss d mest cp d ct) and the gene at n GHGs, and h w the

e at nsh p s chang ng. in s me nstances, Ca n a s

c mpa ed t the est the u.S. ( .e., e c d ng Ca n a)and the a ge states.

S nce 1996, Ca n as g ss ann a GHG em ss ns

have sen s bstant a y, c mb ng by 15 pe cent. Wh e theate g wth has s wed n a ge pa t s nce 2001, t ta

em ss ns m st sta t d pp ng n de t ed ce em ss nst 1990 eve s by 2020 as mandated by A.B. 32. S nce2006, em ss ns nc eased 0.5 pe cent. Wh e s ng 1.2pe cent m 2006 t 2007 and s pp ng (-0.6%) aga n

n 2008, th s ecent nevenness efects m t p e act snc d ng the nset the ec n m c ecess n, e p ce

h kes and a n t ceab e d p n n- ad t ansp tat n.2

fig 1. total califorNia greeNhouse gas emissioNsgross aNNual emissioNs

m i l l i o N m e t r i c t o N s o f c o 2 e q u i v a l e N t

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Note: Gross greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) includes fossil fuel CO2, with electric imports and international fuels (carbon dioxide equivalents) anoncarbon GHG emissions (in CO2 equivalents). Noncarbon GHG emissions are made up of Agriculture (CH4 and N2O), Soils, ODS substitutes, Semi-conductor manufacture (PFCs), ElectrCement, Other Industrial Processes, Solid Waste Management, Landfill Gas, and Wastewater, Methane from oil and gas systems, Methane and N2O from Fossil Fuel Combustion. Data SourcResources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Inventoryby Sector and Activity. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

the carboN ecoNomy

| | | |

|

|

|

36 0

38 0

40 0

42 0

44 0

46 0

48 0

50 0

1 9 9 0 19 9 2 19 9 4 19 9 6 1 9 9 8 20 0 0 20 0 2 20 0 4 2 0 0 6 20 0 8

+ .05%



fig 2. ghg emissioNs aNd gross domest ic productcaliforNias relative treNds siNce 1990 / gross ghg emissioNs aNd gdp dollars per capita

13 0

1 25

1 2 0

1 1 5

1 1 0

1 0 5

10 0

9 5

9 0

8 5

1992 1994 1998 2000 2002 2004 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 8

G D P P E R C A P I TA

G R O S S G H G E M I S S I O N S P E R C A P I TA

1990 1996 i N d e x e d t o 1 9 9 0 ( 1 0 0 =

1 9 9 0 v a l u e s )

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Inventoryby Sector and Activity; Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. DepCalifornia Department of Finance. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

The Ca n a e pe ence dem nst ates that ed c ng GHGem ss ns can be ach eved wh e a s g w ng the ec n my.Ca n as e c ency standa ds b d ngs and app ances

mp emented s nce the 1970s, c p ed w th m t -b nd a t ty nvestments n c st-e ect ve ene gy e c ency,have c nt b ted s gn cant y t the d p n em ss nspe cap ta. S nce 1990, G ss D mest c P d ct (GDP)

pe cap ta g ew by 26 pe cent wh e em ss ns pe cap tad pped by 14 pe cent.

A th gh b th GDP pe cap ta and em ss ns pe cap tas wed m 2007 t 2008, the d p n em ss ns tpacedthat GDP. F m 2007 t 2008, Ca n as GDP pe cap tash ank by 0.9 pe cent, wh e em ss ns pe cap ta d pped bytw pe cent.

|

|

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

t h e c a r b o n e c o n o m y



The Ca n a ec n mys dependence n ca b n-basedene gy c nt n es t essen. rep ted as g ss GHGem ss ns e at ve t GDP, the states ca b n ec n my hasd pped m 4.5 t 3.1 met c t ns ca b n d de eve y $10,000 GDP gene ated. Th s ep esents a d p

32 pe cent s nce 1990 and 1.1 pe cent between 2007and 2008. once the e at nsh p eaches ze , the statesec n my w be c mp ete y ee ts ca b n dependency.

C mpa ed t the states, Ca n a anks th west nca b n-based GHG em ss ns pe cap ta, and tenth h ghest

n GDP pe cap ta. S nce 1990, Ca n a has ed ced tsem ss ns pe cap ta by 13 pe cent. in 2007, Ca n as pecap ta em ss ns we e 50 pe cent be w the est the u.S.(F g e 4). in c nt ast w th the a ge states, the statesem ss ns we e 24 pe cent be w F da and a 62 pe cent

we than Te as. (Pe cap ta em ss ns ep esented he ea e based n the u.S. Ene gy in mat n Adm n st at n and

va y s ght y m the m e c mp ehens ve data ep ted nthe Ca n a Ene gy C mm ss ns GHG invent y.)

in te ms the ca b n ntens ty the ec n my, Ca n aanks th west a te Wash ngt n D.C. and th ee dense y

p p ated states, New Y k, C nnect c t and Massach setts.in c mpa s n w th the a ge states, F da anks 17th andTe as, 35th. The ca b n ntens ty Ca n as ec n my hasdec ned gh y 30 pe cent s nce 1990 (F g e 5) .

emiss ioNs by sec tor

Transportation accounts or the largest source o GHG

emissions in Cali ornia (37%), ollowed by Electric Power

(24%) and Industrial (21%). Together, these sources represent

82 percent o the states emissions. The Cali ornia Air

Resources Board collects GHG emissions data by direct

source o emissions rather than by end-user. Figure 7

depicts Cali ornias GHG emissions by detailed source.

fig 3. the carboN ecoNomygross emissioNs relative to gross domestic product / ca liforNia

5

4

3

2

1

0

19 92 1994 199 8 2000 2002 2004 2 0 0 6 20 0 819 90 1996

CARBON FREE ECONOMY

g h g e m i s s i o N s / $ 1 0

, 0 0 0 g d p

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Inventoryby Sector and Activity; Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. DepartmCommerce; California Department of Finance. Analysis: Collaborative Economics


|

|

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |



fig 4. ghg emissioNs iN ca liforNia aNd other s tatesco2 emissioNs from fossil fuel combustioN / metric toNs of co2 equivaleNt (mtco2) per capita

2 5

3 0

3 5

2 0

1 5

1 0

5

0

1992 1994 19 98 2 000 20 02 200 4 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 7199 0 199 6

T E X A S

U . S . W I T H O U T C A

F L O R I D A

C A L I F O R N I A m e t r i c t o N s o f c o 2 e m i s s i o N s p e r c a p i t a

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy; Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau; California Department of FinAnalysis: Collaborative Economics

2007 NatioNal raNkiNg

lowest ghgemissioNsper capita

highestgdp percapita

% oftotal

u.s. gdp

c n 5 10 13%

t 39 19 8%

f 12 34 5%

perceNt chaNge / 2006-2007

ghg emissioNsper capita

gdp percapita

c n +0.2% +0.6%

t -1.0% +2.3%

f -1.7% -1.0%

u.s. c n +0.8% +1.0%

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: EnergyInformation Administration, U.S. Department of Energy; Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce; Population Division,U.S. Census Bureau; California Department of Finance. Analysis:Collaborative Economics

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source:Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of EnergyBureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of CommerceAnalysis: Collaborative Economics

NatioNal carboN ecoNomy raNkiNg

2007 lowest carboN ecoNomy (emissioNs/gdp)

d c 1

N y 2

c nn 3

m 4

c n 5

f 17

t 35


|

|

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |



fig 5. the carboN ecoNomy iN ca liforNia aNd other s tatescarboN emissioNs (metric toNs) per 10,000 dollars gdp

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

1 1

1 2

1 3

4

3

2

1

01992 1994 1998 2000 2 002 20 04 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 71990 1996

T E X A S

U . S . W I T H O U T C A

F L O R I D A

C A L I F O R N I A * c a r b o N e m i s s i o N s ( m e t r i c t o N s ) / $ 1 0

, 0 0 0 g d p

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. *GHG emissions data that allows for state-level comparison is from the Energy Information Administration and is limited to carbonemissions (fossil fuel combustion). Therefore, data represented here differs from analyses represented in other charts of total GHG emissions for California. Data Source: Energy InformationAdministration, U.S. Department of Energy; Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

Transportation 37%: Em ss ns m a t ansp tat ns ces acc nt 37 pe cent Ca n as t ta GHGem ss ns. Em ss ns nc de the w ng s ces: n- adpassenge veh c es, n- ad heavy d ty t cks, sh ps &b ats, c m t ves, n n- ad t ansp tat n, and d mest c( nt a-state) av at n. i the em ss ns m pet e m

e n ng ( n the nd st a sect ) we e nc ded, t w dbe 44 pe cent. on- ad passenge veh c es acc nt the vast maj ty (93%) t ansp tat n em ss ns.

Electric Power 24% : in-state e ect c p we gene at n( nc d ng nat a gas and the e s) acc nts 47pe cent e ect c p we em ss ns, wh e the ema n ng53 pe cent s m e ect c p we mp ts. E ect cp we em ss ns enc mpass t ta em ss ns e ated te ect c ty gene at n.

Industrial 21%: r gh y 21 pe cent Ca n as em ss nsa e m nd st a act v t es. Em ss ns m nd st as ces c me m pet e m e n ng, & gas e t act n/s pp y, gene a e se, c gene at n heat tp t, cementp ants, and s, and the p cess em ss ns.

Residential 6%: GHG em ss ns m the es dent a sectacc nt s pe cent t ta em ss ns n the state. GHGem ss ns n the es dent a sect a e m e c mb st n

m nat a gas and the e se. F e s b ned n de theat h ses and b d ngs, p epa e d, and h t wate .3

Agriculture & Forestry 6%: Em ss ns m Ag c t e& F est y acc nt s pe cent Ca n as t taem ss ns and a e m vest ck, s p epa at n and

e t ze app cat n, t act s, ag c t a p mps & these, c p g wth & ha vest ng, and w d es.

Commercial 3%: Em ss ns m c mme c a e c mb st nand c gene at n heat tp t acc nt th ee pe cent em ss ns statew de. The vast maj ty em ss ns a e m

e c mb st n m nat a gas and the e se. S m at the es dent a sect , e s b ned n de t heatb d ngs, p epa e d, and h t wate .

High Global Warming Potentials (GWP) 3%: H ghGWP makes p th ee pe cent Ca n as t taGHG em ss ns. H gh GWP nc des z ne dep et ngs bstance (oDS) s bst t tes, e ect c ty g d sses, and

sem c nd ct man act ng.


|

|

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |



fig 6. greeNhouse gas emissioNs by sourcecaliforNia 2008

21 % INDUSTRIAL

6% RESIDENTIAL

6% AGRICULTURE& FORESTRY

3% HIGH GWP

3% COMMERCIALTRANSPORTATION 37 %

ELECTRIC POWER 24 %

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Inventoryby Sector and Activity. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

1 4 0

1 6 0

1 8 0

LIVESTOCK

REFINERIES

GENERALFUEL USE

OIL & GASEXTRACTION

IN-STATENATURAL GAS

UNSPECIFIEDIMPORTS

SPECIFIEDIMPORTS

PASSENGERVEHICLES

HEAVY DUTYTRUCKS

COGEN. HEAT OUTPUT

CEMENT PLANTSOTHER PROCESS EMMISIONSLANDFILLS

CROP GROWTH & HARVESTINGGENERAL FUEL USEWILDFIRE

A G R I C

U L T U R

E &

F O R E

S T R Y

T R A N

S P O R

T A T I O N

E L E C T R

I C P O

W E R

I N D U S

T R I A L

R E S I D

E N T I A

L

H I G H G

W P

C O M M

E R C I A

L

RAILSHIPS & COMMERCIAL BOATS

AVIATION (INTRASTATE)UNSPECIFIED

IN-STATEOTHER FUELS

fig 7. greeNhouse gas emissioNs by detailed sourcecaliforNia 2008

m i l l i o N m e t r i c

t o N s o f c o 2 e q u i v a l e N t

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California Air Resources Board- California Greenhouse Gas Inventoryby Sector and Activity. Analysis: Collaborative Economi


|

|

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |



0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

14 0

1 6 0

1 8 0

2 0 0

C A L I F O R N I A

R E S T O F T H E U . S .

1990 19 92 19 96 2000 20041994 1998 20 02 2006 200 8

fig 8. eNergy productivit ygdp relative to total eNergy coNsumptioN / califorNia aNd the rest of the u.s.

e N e r g y p r o d u c t i v i t y : r e a l g d p ( m i l l i o N s o f d o l l a r s )

r e l a t i v e t o e N e r g y c o N s u m p t i o N ( t r i l l i o N b )

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration; U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.Analysis: Collaborative Economics

Ca n as ene gy p d ct v ty s 68 pe cent h ghe thanthat the est the nat n, and t s mp v ng at a aste

ate (F g e 8). in 2008, Ca n a p d ced $2.28 GDP eve y 10,000 B t sh The ma un ts (BTu) ene gy

c ns med. in c mpa s n, the est the un ted Statesp d ced $1.36 eve y 10,000 BTu ene gy c ns med.Th s d e ence n ene gy p d ct v ty between Ca n a andthe est the u.S. s ab t 93 cents pe 10,000 BTu ene gy c ns med. in 1990, Ca n as ene gy p d ct v tywas 63 pe cent h ghe than that the est the c nt y.

ove the ast decades, Ca n ans have beenc ns m ng ess ene gy pe cap ta (F g e 9). S nce 1970,

Ca n a has ed ced ts ene gy c ns mpt n pe cap ta by20 pe cent, wh e u.S. c ns mpt n pe cap ta has ema ned

a ge y ab ve 1970 eve s. M st ecent y, c ns mpt n hasd pped e ated t the ec n m c d wnt n. Between 2007and 2008 t ta ene gy c ns mpt n d pped by 1.3 pe cent

n Ca n a and by 2.1 pe cent n the est the c nt y, andpe cap ta c ns mpt n e by th ee pe cent n b th.

T ta e ect c ty se n Ca n a has been nc eas ng s nce1990, and pe cap ta c ns mpt n has ema ned w th n vepe cent 1990 eve s (F g e 10). F m 1990 t 2009, t tae ect c ty c ns mpt n g ew by 22 pe cent, and pe cap tac ns mpt n dec ned by s pe cent.

eNergy eff icieNcy

| | | |

|

|

|


21/72



1 9 8 9

1 9 9 0

1 9 9 1

1 9 9 2

1 9 9 3

1 9 9 4

1 9 9 5

1 9 9 6 1 9

9 7 1 9

9 8 1 9

9 9 2 0

0 0 2 0

0 1 2 0

0 2 2 0

0 3 2 0

0 4 2 0

0 5 2 0

0 6 2 0

0 7

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

fig 11. califorNia waste disposal per capi tapouNds per day

p o u N d s p e r d a y

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California Intergated Waste Management Board and the State of California, D epartment of Finance. Analysis: Collaborative Economic

Ca n ans a e gene at ng ess waste headed t and s.N t n y d es th s mean that and s can be sed ngebe e b d ng new nes, b t ess waste n and s a smeans ess gene at n methane gas em ss ns, ane t eme y pe s stent GHG.

in 2007, the ave age Ca n an d sp sed 5.7 p nds waste eve y day.4 Da y waste d sp sa pe cap ta n Ca n a

dec eased 31 pe cent s nce 2007. F m 2006 t 2007,waste d sp sa pe cap ta dec eased seven pe cent. M ch th s s ccess can be e p a ned by the states st ng ecyc ngp g am, wh ch has ach eved a waste d ve s n ate ve50 pe cent.5

e n e r g y e f f i c i e n c y

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

|

|

|

|



Ca n a ema ns a g ba eade n the g w ng and d ve see ds c ean techn gy, and nvestment s p n the st

ha 2010. The g ba nanc a c s s has dea t a seve eb w t the vent e cap ta nd st y s nce the end 2008.T ta vent e cap ta (VC) nvestment n Ca n a d pped36 pe cent m 2008 t 2009 (F g e 12). G ba y, t ta

nvestment eve s eset back t 2003 eve s, and the statewas h t pa t c a y ha d. in c nt ast , g ba nvestment nc eantech eset n y t 2007 eve s. in Ca n a, 2009

nvestment n c eantech e ceeded 2007 eve s by 14 pe cent.

in the st tw q a te s 2010, nvestment n c eantech j mped tw and a ha t mes ve the st ha 2009. Th ss ggests that nvest s a e ee ng c n dent ab t g w ng

pp t n t es n these d ve se techn gy e ds. A th gh Vnvestment n c ean techn gy a s e by 36 pe cent m

2008 t 2009, c eantech VC ep esents a g w ng sha e t ta VC n Ca n a. in 2009, nvestment n c eantech

acc nted 25 pe cent t ta VC, c mpa ed w th n y13 pe cent n 2007.

$ 0

$ 1 2

$ 2 4

$ 3 6

$ 4 8

$ 6 0

1 9 9 9

2 0 0 0

2 0 0 1

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 5

2 0 0 7

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 8

2 0 0 9

2 0 0 3

2 0 0 2

25 %

20 %

10 %

5 %

15 %

0 %

CLEANTECHNOLOGY

TOTAL

fig 12. veNture capitalcleaN techNology aNd total iNvestmeNt / califorNia

b i l l i o N s o f d o l l a r s i N v e s t e d i N v e N t u r e c a p i t a l

( i N f l a t i o N a d j u s t e d )

c l e a N t e c h N o l o g y v c a s a s h a r e o f t o t a l v c

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers/National Venture Capital Association MoneyTree Report, Data: Thomson Reuters; Cleantech Group, LLC.Analysis: Collaborative Economics

greeN techNol ogy iNNovatioN

| | | |

|

|

|



$ 0

. 0

$ 0

. 5

$ 1

. 0

$ 1

. 5

$ 2

. 0

$ 2

. 5

$ 3

. 0

$ 3

. 5

$ 4

. 0

2005 2006 20 07 2 008 20 09

0 . 5

2 . 2

RECYCLING & WASTEMANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL

AGRICULTURE

3 . 4

1 . 2

1 . 9

OTHER

WATER & WASTEWATER

AIR & ENVIRONMENT

MATERIALS

ENERGY STORAGE

ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE

TRANSPORTATION

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

ENERGY GENERATION

11 % ENERGYINFRASTRUCTURE

4% ENERGY STORAGE

3% MATERIALS

2% AIR & ENVIRONMENT

1% WATER & WASTEWATER

1% OTHER

ENERGY EFFICIENCY 18 %

ENERGY GENERATION 42 %

18 % TRANSPORTATION

fig 13a. veNture capital iNvestmeNt iN clea N techNology by segmeNtbillioNs of dollars iNvested / califorNia

fig. 13b. califorNia veNture capital iNvestmeNt iN cleaN techNologydistributioN by cleaNtech segmeNt / 2009

b i l l i o N s o f d o l l a r s i N v e s t e d ( i N f l a t i o N a d j u s t e d )

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: Cleantech Group, LLC. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: Cleantech Group, LLC. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

g r e e n t e c h n o l o g y i n n o v a t i o n

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | |

|

| | | | | | | |

|

|

cleaNtech vc iNvestmeNtq1 & q2 califorNia

% chaNge2009-2010

iNvestmeNt $ +246%

Number of deals +65%

Note: Values are Inflation Adjusted



Ene gy gene at n, nc d ng s a , w nd and ge the ma ,c nt n es t att act the g eatest am nt c eantech vent ecap ta nvestment (F g e 13A). in 2009, ene gy gene at n

ece ved 42 pe cent a vent e cap ta nvestment nc ean techn gy n Ca n a, wh e ene gy e c ency andt ansp tat n each ece ved 18 pe cent t ta nvestments

n the state. C ean techn gy n t ansp tat n nc dese ect c veh c es and ght a s (F g e 13B). o a a eas,

nvestment n ene gy e c ency, nc d ng sma t g dtechn gy, s g w ng astest. Ene gy e c ency nvestment

nc eased 101 pe cent ve the p ev s yea , wh e ene gy

gene at n nvestment dec eased 61 pe cent.

Att act ng 54 pe cent c eantech nvestment n the state,S c n Va ey c nt n es t be the h t sp t c eantech(F g e 14). in 2009, S c n Va ey att acted $1.2 b n

nvestment. Wh e VC nvestment d pped n nea y eve yeg n, nvestment m e than t p ed n the San D egeg n n 2009.

in the c nte t the g ba nanc a c s s, p ject nanc ng c eantech nsta at ns has been sq eezed. T he p b dge

th s gap, the state was awa ded $1.8 b n n p b c nds c eantech p jects nde the Ame can re nvestment and

rec ve y Act (F g e 15).

R E S T

O F C A

L I F O R

N I A

S A N D

I E G O A

R E A

L O S A

N G E L E

S R E G

I O N

S A N F

R A N C

I S C O R

E G I O N

W I T H

O U T S

I L I C O

N V A L

L E Y

S I L I C O

N V A L

L E Y

200720062005

$ 0 . 0

$0.2

$ 0 .4

$0.6

$0.8

$ 1 . 0

$1.2

$1.4

$1.6

$1.8

$ 2 . 0

20082009

fig 14. veNture capital iNvestmeNt iN cleaNtechNology by regioNbillioNs of dollars iNvested

b i l l i o N s o f d o l l a r s i N v e s t e d ( i N f l a t i o N a d j u s t e d )

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: Cleantech Group, LLC . Analysis: Collaborative Economics

$0.0

$0.2

$0.4

$0.6

$0.8

$1.0

$1.2

$1.4

$1.6

$1.8

$2.0

$2.2

V E N T

U R E C

A P I T A

L

P U B L

I C I N

V E S T

M E N T

fig 15. veNture capital aNd publiciNvestmeNt iN cleaN techNologycaliforNia, 2009

b i l l i o N s o f d o l l a r s

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN

iNdex. Data Source: Cleantech Group, LL C(www.cleantech.com); Independent RecoveryTransparency and Accountability Board.Analysis: Collaborative Economics


|

|

|

|

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

|

|



fig 16. greeN techNology pateNtsby techNology / califorNia

0

5 0

1 0 0

1 5 0

2 0 0

2 5

0

3 0 0

3 5 0

4 0 0

4 5 0

5 0 0

1 9 9 5

- 1 9 9 7

2 0 0 7

- 2 0 0

9

2 0 0 4

- 2 0 0

6

2 0 0 1

- 2 0 0

3

1 9 9 8

- 2 0 0

0

HYDRO POWER

GEOTHERMAL ENERGY

ENERGY

INFRASTRUCTURE

HYBRID SYSTEMS

WIND ENERGY

SOLAR ENERGY

FUEL CELLS

BATTERIES

N u m b e r o f g r e e N t e c h N o l o g y p a t e N t s

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: 1790 Analytics, Patents by Technology; USPTO Patent File. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

W th m e than 450 g een techn gy patents eg ste edbetween 2007 and 2009, Ca n a anks st n the u.S .

n t ta g een techn gy patents. Spec ca y, the state sat the t p n patents e ated t Advanced Batte es, S aEne gy, and W nd Ene gy.

Patent eg st at ns e ated t c ean ene gy techn g esnc eased b st y n 2009 as a es t nc eased ngs

m e gn and d mest c nvent s w th the u.S. C mme ceDepa tments Patent and T adema k o ce (uSPTo). F m2008 t 2009, eg st at ns m u.S . nvent s se 31pe cent and m e gn nvent s, 39 pe cent (F g e 17).S nce 1998, patent ng act v ty w th the uSPTo n g eentechn gy by e gn nvent s has tpaced u.S. nvent s.

in an e t t speed the c mme c a zat n p cess these mp tant new techn g es, the uSPTo ann nced

n Decembe 2009 that t p ans t a nch a p g am tacce e ate the ev ew p cess g een techn gy patent

app cat ns.6 C ent y, g een patent app cat ns typ ca yace a ev ew t me 30 t 40 m nths. The new p g am

w ed ce the wa t t me by gh y ne yea , e ped t ngthe dep yment g een techn g es.

Ca n a acc nts a a ge and g w ng pe centage nat na g een patent act v ty. Ca n a s the t p state npatents eg ste ed n s a , w nd and batte y techn gy.

F m 2007 t 2009, Ca n a ep esented 39 pe cent S a Ene gy patents eg ste ed n the u.S., p m 24

pe cent n the pe d 1995 t 1997. Ca n a acc nts 20 pe cent a Batte y Techn gy patents eg ste ed nthe u.S. between 2007 and 2009, and 16 pe cent t taW nd Ene gy patent eg st at ns.

S nce 1995, t ta g een techn gy patent eg st at nsg ew by 29 pe cent. Ca n a has ma nta ned a h gh eve

act v ty n Batte y Techn gy patents. S nce 1995,eg st at ns n F e Ce Techn gy have g wn astest .


|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | |

|

| | | | | | | |

|

|



fig 17. greeN techNology pateNt registratioNsby primary iNveNtors / cali forNia, u.s., aNd foreigN iNveNtor pateNt registratioNs

0

2 5 0

5 0 0

7 5 0

1 ,

0 0 0

1 ,

2 5 0

1 ,

5 0 0

1 ,

7 5 0

1 9 9 0

1 9 9 2

1 9 9 4

1 9 9 6

1 9 9 8

2 0 0 0

2 0 0 2

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 8

FOREIGN

U.S .

2 0 0 9

. . . . . . ..

. .. .

. . . . . . ..

. . . . . . .. . . . .

. .. . . .

..

CALIFORNIA

p a t e N t s r e g i s t e r e d w i t h

u . s .

p a t e N t & t r a d e o f f i c e


fig 18. greeN techNology pateNtscaliforNia perceNtage of u.s. greeN techNology pateNts

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

H y d r o

P o w e r

G e o t h e

r m a l

E n e r g y

E n e r g y

I n f r a s

t r u c t u

r e

H y b r i d

S y s t e

m s

F u e l C

e l l s

W i n d E

n e r g y

B a t t e r

i e s

S o l a r

E n e r g y

2 0 0 4 - 2 0 0 6

1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 01 9 9 5 - 1 9 9 7

2 0 0 1 - 2 0 0 32 0 0 7 - 2 0 0 9

c a l i f o r N i a p e r c e N t a g e o f u

. s .

g r e e N t e c h N o l o g y p a t e N t s



|

|

|

|

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

|

|



total greeN tech pateNts

top raNkiNg states iN pateNts registered

Number of pateNt s raNkiNg

2007-2009 2007-2009 1995-1997

c n 458 1 1

N y 307 2 2

m n 295 3 7

t 135 4 6

m 110 5 3

c nn 103 6 14

i n 98 7 4

m nn 82 8 13

o 81 9 9

p nn n 76 10 10

solar techNology


Number of pateNts raNkiNg

2007-2009 2007-2009 1995-1997

c n 87 1 1

N y 16 2 3

m 14 3 8

N h 12 4 32

N m 11 5 16

c 10 6 3

m n 8 7 6

t 7 8 2

N j 6 9 10

f 5 10 5

battery techNology



2007-2009 2007-2009 1995-1997

c n 198 1 1

t 72 2 8

m n 68 3 9

i n 59 4 6

N y 53 5 2

w n n 49 6 3

m 44 7 5

f 38 8 4

m nn 38 8 11

o 37 10 7

wiNd techNology



2007-2009 2007-2009 1995-1997

c n 32 1 1

N y 29 2 14

m 10 3 2

t 9 4 2

a n 8 5 27

i n 8 5 7

N 8 5 7

o 8 5 27

v n 8 5 14

m n 7 10 14



|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | |

|

| | | | | | | |

|

|



in t ansp tat n, Ca n ans a e ad pt ng new behav sand bec m ng ea y ad pte s new techn gy. Em ss ns

m s ace t ansp tat n have dec ned n ecent yea s asa es t many act s nc d ng the ec n m c ecess nbeg nn ng n 2007 and sp kes n gas ne p ces.7

A th gh Ca n a acc nted n ne pe cent a neweg ste ed veh c es n the un ted States n 2008, 24 pe cent

a te nat ve e veh c es n the nat n we e eg ste edn Ca n a. As a sha e t ta new y eg ste ed veh c e

a te nat ve e veh c es n Ca n a acc nt m e td b e the sha e n the ead ng states.

0 %

0 . 5

%

1 . 0 %

1 . 5 %

2 . 0

%

2 . 5

%

2 0 0 0

2 0 0 1

2 0 0 2

2 0 0 3

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 5

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 7

2 0 0 8

CALIFORNIA

NEW YORK

UNITED STATES

ILLINOIS

FLORIDA

TEXAS

fig 19. alterNative fuel veh iclesas share of total Newly registered vehicles / califo rNia aNd other top a lterNative fuel vehicle states

a l t e r N a t i v e f u e l v e h i c l e s a s s h a r e o f a l l N e w l y r e g i s t e r e d v e h i c l e s

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Note: Includes hybrid and electric vehicles as well as vehicles running on natural gas. Data Source: R.L. Polk & Co.Analysis: Collaborative Economics

t raNsportat ioN

| | | |

|

|

|



ove the ng-te m, the t ta n mbe a te nat ve eveh c es eg ste ed s g w ng ap d y and was nea y 50t mes h ghe n 2008 than n 2002 (F g e 20). F m2007 t 2008, t ta veh c e eg st at ns d pped by 0.2pe cent, b t eg st at ns a te nat ve e veh c es g ewby 31 pe cent. H d ng steady s nce 2007, a te nat ve eveh c e eg st at ns acc nt 2.1 pe cent t ta new y

eg ste ed veh c es.

A te nat ve e c ns mpt n as a pe centage t tat ansp tat n e c ns mpt n has stead y nc eased

n Ca n a, c mb ng m 0.46 pe cent n 2003 t 0.69

pe cent n 2007 (F g e 21). By c mpa s n, c ns mpt n

a te nat ve e s nat nw de has a ge y ema ned stat c at0.15 pe cent n 2003 and 2007 (F g e 21).

The se a te nat ve e s s p n Ca n a wh e thec ns mpt n c nvent na gas ne s d wn. Between2006 and 2007, a te nat ve e se j mped n ne pe centand the se c nvent na e d pped 0.4 pe cent. inv ew nge te m c ns mpt n t ends, c nvent na e s

nc eased pe cent and a te nat ve e s, 55 pe cent(F g e 22). Meanwh e, c nvent na e se n the u.S.dec eased ne pe cent m 2006 t 2007, wh e a te nat ve

e se nc eased ne pe cent. l nge v ew c ns mpt n

t ends sh w an nc ease pe cent n c nvent na ese and th ee pe cent n a te nat ve e se.

fig 20. total Number of alterNative fuel vehicles registeredcaliforNia

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

ELECTRICNATURAL GAS

HYBRID

2 0 0 0

2 0 0 3

2 0 0 5

2 0 0 7

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 1

2 0 0 2

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 8

t o t a l N u m b e r o f a l t e r N a t i v e f u e l v e h i c l e s r e g i s t e r e d

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California Energy Commission. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

t r a n s p o r t a t i o n

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|



0 %

0 . 1

%

0 . 2

%

0 . 3

%

0 . 4

%

0 . 5

%

0 . 6

%

0 . 7

%

CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES

20 0 3 20 0 5 20 0 720 0 4 20 0 6

fig 21. alterNative fuel coNsumptioN as a perceNtage of total traNsportatioNfuel coNsumptioN

p e r c e N t a g e o f t o t a l f u e l

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: Alternative Fuels DataEIA Coal, Nuclear, and Renewables Division Alternatives to TraditionalTransportation Fuels, 2007, Table C4. Motor Gasoline DataState Energy D ata System, Series MG ACP Motor gasoline consumed by the transportation sector.Analysis: Collaborative Economics

fig 22. coNsumptioN of gasoliNe aNd alterNative fuelscaliforNia

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

14.9

15

15.1

15.2

15.3

15.4

15.5

15.6

15.7

15.8

15.9 ELECTRIC

ETHANOL, 85 PERCENT(E85)

LIQUEFIED NATURALGAS (LNG)

LIQUEFIED PETROLEUMGAS (LPG)

COMPRESSED NATURALGAS (CNG)

CONVENTIONAL GASOLINE

2 0 0 3

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 5

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 7

(IN MILLIONS)

a l t e r N a t i v e f u e l s ( t h o u s a N d g a s o l i N e e q u i v a l e N t g a l l o N s )

c o N v e N t i o N a l g a s o l i N e ( t h o u s a N d g a l l o N s m o t o r g a s o l i N e )

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: Alternative Fuels DataEIA Coal, Nuclear, and Renewables DivisionAlternatives to Traditional Transportation Fuels, 2007, Table C4. Motor Gasoline DataState Energy Dat a System, Series MG ACPMotor gasoline consumed by the transportation sector. Analysis: Collaborative Economics


| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

|

|

|

|



califorNia vmt perceNt chaNge

2007-2008

total -1.4%

per capi ta -2.8%

VMT PER CAPITA

0

1 0 0

2 0 0

3 0 0

4 0 0

1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2008

0

2,500

5,000

7,500

10,000

TOTAL VMT (BILLIONS)

fig 23. treNds iN vehicle miles tr aveledtotal aNd per capita / califorNia

fig 24. treNds iN vehicle miles traveled aNd ghg e missioNs from surface traNsportatioNtotal aNd per capita treNds relative to 1995 / califorNi a

t o t a l v m t ( b i l l i o N s )

v m t p e r c a p i t a

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Note: Includes VMT on state highway systems and other public roads.Data Source: California Department of Transportation; California Department of Finance. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

9 0

9 5

1 0 0

1 0 5

1 1 0

1 1 5

1 2 0

1 2 5

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION

EMISSIONS PER CAPITA

VMT PER CAPITA

TOTAL VMT

TOTAL S URFACE

TRANSPORTATION

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2 0 0 2 2003 2004 2005 20 06 2 00 82 0 0 7 t r e N d s r e l a t i v e t o 1 9 9 5 ( 1 0 0 =

1 9 9 5 v a l u e s )

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Inventoryby Sector and Activity; California Department ofTransportation; California Department of Finance. Analysis: Collaborative Economics


| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|



Ca n ans a e d v ng ess. F m 2007 t 2008, t taveh c e m es t ave ed (VMT) d pped by 1.4 pe centthea gest d p s nce 1995. Pe cap ta VMT a s e by 2.8

pe cent. ove the ng-te m, the e has been a d wnwa dt end n VMT pe cap ta. S nce the peak n 2001, VMT hasdec ned by nea y ve pe cent.

A te h d ng steady s nce 2005, GHG em ss ns ms ace t ansp tat n d pped pe cent between2007 and 2008.

P b c t ans t de sh p n Ca n a s n the se ac stypes t ans t , yet t ans t ava ab ty s sh nk ng. in 200the n mbe t ta ann a passenge s was 16 pe centh ghe than n 2004.

r de sh p s g w ng n a types t ans t, yet the n mbe t ans t tes s a ng. Wh e the t ta n mbe passeng

nc eased pe cent s nce 2007, p b c t ans t ava abdec ned ve th s pe d. F m 2007 t 2008, t ta even em es dec eased by 15 pe cent. The h ghest g wth n

de sh p was n a t ans t , w th an nc ease 13 pe cents nce 2007.

growth iN public traNsit ridership

2007-2008 califorNia

rail +13%

street car +11%

trolly +8%

bus +1%

total +4% 0

2 5 0

5 0 0

7 5 0

1 ,

0 0 0

1 ,

2 5 0

1 ,

5 0 0

TROLLY

STREETCA R

1 9 9 4

1 9 9 6

1 9 9 9

2 0 0 3

2 0 0 6

1 9 9 5 1 9

9 7 2 0

0 1 2 0

0 5 1 9

9 8 2 0

0 2 2 0

0 0 2 0

0 4 2 0

0 7 2 0

0 8

RAIL

BU S

fig 25. public traNsit usetotal aNNual passeNgers by traNsit type / califorNi a

m i l l i o N s o f p a s s e N g e r s

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California State Controller s Office. Analysis: Collaborative Economics


| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

|

|

|

|


34/72

S A N J O A Q U I NVA L L E Y

L O S A N G E L E SA R E A

O R A N G EC O U N T Y

I N L A N D E M P I R E

S A N D I E G O R E G I O N

S A C R A M E N T OA R E A

S A C R A M E N T OVA L L E Y

C E N T R A LC O A S T

N O RT HC O A S T S I E R R A

R E G I O N

S I E R R AR E G I O N

B AYA R E A

5 3

3

4

65

18

9

14

56

21

6

30

traNsportatioN / vehicle miles tr aveled, public traNsit ridership,New alterNative fuel vehicle registratioNs / 2008

coNceNtratioN above the stateaverage iN New alterNative fuelvehicle registratioNs

Electric

Hybrid

Natural Gas

aNNual vehicle miles of travel per capita

Less than 8,500

8,500 9,499

9,500 10,499

10,500 or More

aNNual public traNsit ridership(Number of rides per cap ita)

=

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex.

Transportation; California State Controller s Office; R.L. Polk & Co.;California Department of FinanceAnalysis and Cartography: Collaborative Economics

32 D A S H B o A r D i N D i C ATo r S


| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|


35/72

fig 26. total vehicles aNd ghg emis sioNscaliforNia

1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2008

25

0

50

75

10 0

12 5

15 0

17 5

20 0

0

5

1 0

1 5

2 0

2 5

3 0

3 5

4

0

TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHIC LESREGISTERED IN CALIFORNIA (MILLIONS)

GHG EMISSIONS (MMTCO2E) FROMSURFACE TRANSPORTATION

t o t a l N u m b e r o f v e h i c l e s ( m i l l i o N s )

g h g e m i s s i o N s ( m m t c o 2 e ) f r o m s u r f a c e t r a N s p o r t a t i o N

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Note: Total number of vehicles are for all vehicles registered in California including cars, trucks, buses, and motorcycles.Data Source: California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas InventoryBy Sector and Activity; Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.Analysis: Collaborative Economics

332 0 1 0 C Al i F o r N i A G r E E N i N N o VATi o N i N D E x

W th 65 des pe cap ta n 2008, the Bay A ea b asts theh ghest p b c t ans t se, wed by the l s Ange es A eaw th 56 des pe cap ta. These eg ns a s have the west

eve s VMT pe cap ta n the state. B th eg ns, a ngw th o ange C nty, have c ncent at ns h ghe than thestate ave age n hyb d and nat a gas veh c es. reg ns w thh ghe than state ave age c ncent at ns n e ect c veh c es

nc de the Sac ament A ea, o ange C nty, in and Emp e,and San D eg as we as the m e a a eas Sac amentVa ey, Cent a C ast, N th C ast, and S e a reg n.

in chang ng the t ansp tat n hab ts, Ca n ans a emak ng a d e ence n ed c ng GHG em ss ns. They a ed v ng ess, s ng m e a te nat ves t d v ng a ne andsh t ng t we -em ss n veh c es and e s. The t tan mbe veh c es n the state d pped by 1.3 pe cent m2007 t 2008. T gethe , these changes p d ced a pe cent ed ct n n Co2 em ss ns m Ca n as t taveh c e feet between 2007 and 2008.


| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | | | | | | |

|

|

|

|



Ca n as enewab e ene gy es ces a e h d ng steadyb t n t g w ng. S nce 2002 t ta enewab e ene gygene at n nc eased by n ne pe cent. ove th s pe d,w nd ene gy gene at n has m e than d b ed. Ca n asrenewab es P t Standa d s a d ve beh nd th s g wth

e ated t nvest - wned t t es.

A th gh ene gy gene at n m enewab e s ces hassen, enewab e ene gy gene at n as a pe centage

t ta ene gy gene at n has ema ned steady. in 2008, 10.6pe cent Ca n as t ta ene gy came m enewab es ces. Nat nw de, n y th ee pe cent t ta ene gygene at n s m enewab e s ces b t th s ep esents aha pe cent nc ease m the p ev s yea .

Acc d ng t the S a E ect c P we Ass c at n, as May2010, ve the t p ten s a ene gy p d c ng t t es n theun ted States we e cated n Ca n a. in 2007, Ca n a

anked st n s a ene gy gene at n, ep esent ng ve 90pe cent the t ta u.S. net s a e ect c ty gene at n.

F m 2008 t 2009, new y nsta ed s a capac ty nc eased

by 14 pe cent th gh t Ca n a a te g w ng by and a ha t mes m 2007 t 2008 (F g e 29A). ove a ,th s g wth s d ect y e ated t the p cy nn vat n theCa n a S a in t at ve wh ch he ps ed ce the p ntc sts t c st me s th gh ebates. in add t n, p ces ph t v ta c m d es a e the west they have been s nce2003, 8 s the s we e pans n n 2009 s ke y d e t

m ted pp t n t es p ject nanc ng.9

S a capac ty s e pand ng neven y ac ss sect s.up 42 pe cent m the p yea , the es dent a sectacc nted the b k the g wth n 2009 (F g e 29B).Acc nt ng n y s pe cent capac ty, nsta at ns nthe g ve nment sect e panded nea y th ee d.

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000 SOLARSMALL HYDRO

BIOMASSWIND

GEOTHERMAL

2 0 0 2

2 0 0 3

2 0 0 5

2 0 0 7

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 8

+9 %

fig 27. califorNia reNe wable eNergy geNeratioNgigawatt hours by source

g i g a w a t t h o u r s

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California Energy Commission. Analysis: Collaborative Economics

reNewable eNergy

| | | |

|

|

|



3.0%

0 %

2 %

4 %

6 %

7 %

8 %

1 0 %

1 2 %

2 0 0 2

2 0 0 3

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 5

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 7

2 0 0 8

10.4%10.6% 10.7%

10.9%10.7% 10.6%

11.0%

2.0% 2.1% 2.2%2.4% 2.5%

2.1%

CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES

fig 28. perceNt of total eNergy geNeratioN from reNewable sourcescaliforNia aNd uNited states

p e r c e N t o f e N e r g y g e N e r a t i o N f r o m r e N e w a b l e s o u r c e s

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California Energy Commission; Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy.Analysis: Collaborative Economics

r e n e w a b l e e n e r g y

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | |

| | | | |

|

|

fig 29a. New solar iNs tallatioNscapacity (kw) iNstalled through the califorNiasolar iNitiative / califorNia

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

2 0 0 7

2 0 0 8

2 0 0 9

k i l o w a t t s i N s t a l l e d

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex. Data Source: California PublicUtilities Commission, California Solar Initiative. Analysis: Collaborative Economics


38/72

solar decathloN tests eNergy-efficieNt buildiNg strategies

For three weeks in October 2009, 20 teams of college students gathered for the Solar Decathlon to bui ld a solarvil lage at the National Mall in Washington D.C. Held by the U.S. Department of Energy every couple years since its

founding in 2002, the Solar Decathlon is an international competition to develop and showcase new ideas in solarenergy, energy ef ciency and home design. Each team designs, bui lds and operates an energy-ef cient house, whichis then judged based on ten objective and subjective categories relating to ef ciency, functionality and aesthetics.Team Californ ia, made up of Santa Clara University and Cali fornia College of the Arts s tudents, placed third amongthe 20 teams.Solyndra Breaks Ground on New 500 Megawatt Solar Plant. Web. May 17, 2010. http://www.solyndra.com/News/Press-Release-090409

r e n e w a b l e e n e r g y

|

|

|

|

| | | |

|

|

|

| | | |

| | |

| | | | | |

|

|

|

fig 29b. New solar iNstallatioNs by sectorcapacity (kw) iNstalled through thecaliforNia solar iNitiative

k i l o w a t

t s i N s t a l l e d

Next 10 califorNia greeN iNNovatioN iNdex.

Data Source: California Public Utilities Commission, California Solar Initiative.Analysis: Collaborative Economics

36 D A S H B o A r D i N D i C ATo r S

S a capac ty s e pand ng at d e ent ates ac ssthe state. S me eg ns w th e at ve y h gh e ect c tyc ns mpt n ates c d bene t m g eate s a capac ty( n add t n t ene gy e c ency mp vements). The SanJ aq n Va ey stands t as s ch a eg n, and th s sass c ated w th m t p e act s s ch as the h gh se ac nd t n ng. in c nt ast, the Cent a C ast and San D ega e eg ns w th e at ve y w e ect c ty c ns mpt n pecap ta and h gh s a capac ty pe cap ta. The h ghest eve s

s a capac ty pe cap ta n 2009 we e ep ted n the BayA ea, S e a reg n, Sac ament Va ey, and Cent a C ast.

The m st e c ent eg ns, o ange C nty and the SanD eg reg n ep te

Documents

2010 Green Innovation Index