Monthly Archives: October 2019

What Is POE Lighting?

Power over Ethernet or PoE lighting refers to the ability to use an Ethernet cable to power light fixtures and transmit data between the lamp and the control software. A single cable can both supply power and control the fixtures attached to the network. The Ethernet cable plugged into the fixture provides the fixture not only its on-off power, but through a unique IP address can automatically control the fixture through its software. For each unique IP address the user can program the features it wishes into the light. Such commands from software can be carried by standard Cat 5/6 cable already used by sensors and wall switches.

Data can be collected from attached devices, such as switches or motion sensors, to prompt specific lighting commands. The user can maximize efficiency or comfort by affecting the dimming, timers, sensors, lighting colors, daylight harvesting, etc. based on the appropriate software.

PoE also means information can be sent from the fixture, such as actual energy usage, lumens of light produced, and the condition of the fixture for maintenance purposes instead of waiting for a component to fail.

PoE not only allows the user to control its lighting from a computer or even a mobile phone, but the software can replace more expensive existing equipment, such as a motion sensors, to allow implementation to be more competitive price-wise.

Most PoE systems generate almost no residual heat, which is valuable for temperature control (reducing AC needs) or other potential impacts to the building, such as heat above the ceiling.

Being software-based, PoE likely requires less expensive labor (IT professionals rather than certified electricians) to be used to install or upgrade such systems. In some cases, PoE may be exempt from permits or inspections required of most electrical systems.

PoE is now being produced by a variety of different vendors, giving the user choices.

We are entering a world where fixtures are not simply devices that produce light for a given room or area, but can address other issues, such as security, carbon monoxide concentration, dimming, mood, energy efficiency (turning on and off when needed), providing alarms when necessary for evacuations and to aid first responders, and providing information back to the user thanks to PoE lighting.

CCES has the experts assist you in your lighting needs, whether it is merely switching to more efficient LED lighting, upgrading lighting to improve the productivity of your workers or comfort of your customers, or exploring whether PoE is right for you. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or karell@CCESworld.com.

Recent Activities of Climate Change Litigation

Please note: this is not meant as a legal discussion of the issue. Do not take this information as legal advice. Speak to a legal professional.

In only the last couple of years there has been a major increase in lawsuits against businesses involved in the oil & gas or related industries for the consequences of climate change, including disastrous impacts. Many of these lawsuits have been brought by municipal officials seeking huge amounts of money for use to develop climate change resiliency programs, although, undoubtedly some funds are likely used by government overall coffers. In general, these lawsuits are founded on the claim of public nuisance or lost income due to events they feel was contributed to by these companies. Such lawsuits began in the early part of this decade were dismissed before going to trial. A key case was American Electric Power Company v. Connecticut where 8 states, New York City and three land trusts sued 6 electric power companies, alleging a public nuisance, and seeking an immediate cap and future reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions plus damages. Initially dismissed as “political”, the matter was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court who ruled that the plaintiffs had standing to make a claim of nuisance under federal law, but that in this case they could not because of exemptions of this in the Clean Air Act. In subsequent cases, nuisance claims were dismissed, but plaintiffs had the right to sue for direct damages.

The next issue to come up was whether plaintiffs can sue for nuisance under their state law. However, legal opinion discouraged this due to the interstate (and global) transport of GHGs, that the federal Clean Air Act provisions took precedent over state law, and different states define “nuisance” in different ways.

More recent climate change cases that are currently pending against businesses cover nuisance, but also seek damages based on calculated physical damage and costs and defendants’ production and promotion of fossil fuels. Several cases are currently being appealed based on decisions similar to those described above earlier in the decade. None have been concluded yet and rulings in federal district courts so far mixed. If any succeed, it is likely that more such lawsuits will be filed using the arguments and strategies of the successful ones.

Another type of climate change litigation has picked up steam recently, “public trust” claims where citizen groups bring suit against governments for enacting policies promoting fossil fuel use causing them to lose business, be displaced or suffer other hardships. In one case, Juliana v. United States, the federal government is being sued. A court hearing was held June 2019. One other category of climate change cases concerns alleged violations of state or federal securities laws, such as misrepresenting climate change information or disclosures in public documents, such as a lawsuit brought on by the State of New York against Exxon.

Given this increase in climate change litigation and the likelihood that it will continue so for some time, the insurance industry is beginning to offer policies to minimize risk of such lawsuits and payouts.

The information is presented here by an engineer and is not meant to be a strict legal interpretation of events. For more information and before implementing any policies, speak to a legal professional. This information here should not be taken as legal advice.

CCES has the technical experts to help your firm determine your carbon footprint, your emissions of GHGs and determine ways to reduce them reliably and economically with minimal impact on operations. We do not provide legal advice. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

New Research To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions

See the companion article on new research to promote renewable power. Research is going on in other GHG reduction technologies. After all, there are two ways we can reduce GHG emissions drastically to forestall the effects of Climate Change, for which scientists now predict there is a 90% chance of major deleterious effects. One is a worldwide cultural change and doing actions that will reduce such emissions to meet goals, spurred on by government rules and incentives. That, honestly, is not working, as is the nature of governments and politicians. The other is with new technologies that will reduce GHG emissions, yet are affordable and will fit people’s lifestyles. This article details a few that are in the research phase that have the potential to be effective.

Carbon Capture & Sequestration (CCS)

CCS is a technology that would take CO2 out of a power plant exhaust and insert it deep in a rock formation, returning the carbon to underground. The USEPA is interested in this technology but is concerned about the long-term fate of the CO2 (it may still exit into the atmosphere in time, negating the effort). This summer, a bill was proposed in the House of Representatives, identical to one in the Senate, which would authorize a new type of exempt facility bond to be issued for qualified CCS facilities. The Senate has already passed an act nicknamed “USE IT”, which would support CCS technology through technology prizes, R&D programs to promote the technology, permitting guidance, a mechanism for tax-exempt bonds, and a regional permitting task force. The chances for long-term legislative encouragement seem to be growing stronger.

Nuclear Energy With Less Risk

A company, General Fusion, is working on a new commercially viable nuclear fusion energy power plant. It would produce no GHG emissions, emitting only helium as exhaust, requiring less land than other renewable technologies currently, with no chance of a meltdown scenario and no long-term hazardous waste.

Alternative to Battery Storage

It has been estimated that 20-25% of global GHG emissions derive from the transportation sector. One of the biggest issues holding back the electric cars is the limitations of riding due to current batteries. Researchers have discovered new materials offering an alternative to battery power and proven to be thousands of times more powerful than a supercapacitor. In theory, the new technology could have the potential for electric cars to travel to longer distances, as long as gasoline-fired cars before a recharge is needed, which could take just minutes to achieve. If this can be achieved affordably, then polluting cars can be replaced in large quantities.

Meat Substitutes

It has been estimated that as much as 30% of global GHG emissions derive from the growing desire for meat and dairy in our diets and the methane emissions of over a billion cows used to produce this. One alternative is lab-grown meat and substitutes that look and taste like the real thing. Two companies, Beyond Meat and Impossible Burger, have created plant-based meat burgers from vegetable protein found in plants that appear to fool many people in taste tests. If demand for cow-based meat declines, that would certainly reduce GHG emissions.

Taken together, these technologies would offer people alternatives that are acceptable and affordable and, at the same time, reduce GHG emissions.

CCES has the experts to help your company use existing technologies to be more efficient, use less energy, reduce your carbon footprint, and benefit in other ways. Contact us today at karell@CCESworld.com or at 914-584-6720.