Hat tip to Green Tech Media and Venture Beat’s Green Beat that do great jobs on the money that flows into the space.

Cleantech saw $7.8 Billion in 2010 (the most post-credit bubble), but that was somewhat tempered with slower third and fourth quarters.

“Venture funds are still in a cautious place” as they continue to try to raise money for their own funds, said Sheerez Haji, CEO of Cleantech Group. That makes it hard for early-stage startups, as investors look for later-stage companies where “the technology risk has been taken care of,” he said.

Greentech mentions that December was a big month, however. There were more than 40 solar, smart grid, efficiency, lighting, biofuels, wind and recycling firms that raised more than $700M in VC in December.

A couple of interesting other highlights:

++ OPower, the home energy-efficiency startup, closed on their round C with $50 million led by two of Silicon Valley’s premier VC firms — Kleiner Perkins and Accel Partners, along with New Enterprise Associates. OPower is focused on customer engagement and behavior modification, and is currently providing tens of thousands of homes with in-home energy data and efficiency advice via paper reports or online. The platform is described as advanced customer engagement.

They got a visit from Obama earlier this year with respect to clean jobs.

More on OPower’s $50M raise here.

See our earlier discussion using energy data to curb usage behavior: New Electric Bill could Drive Better Usage

++ Energy efficiency continues to be the hottest segment with 7 deals for $162 million in the fourth quarter per E&Y.

++ Solar saw $150 million in 10 deals.

Ernst & Young itself seems bullish on cleantech’s future. “This quarter reflects the ongoing volatility in cleantech investment that we have observed over the past two years, depending on the presence of the very large transactions we see in cleantech,” said Jay Spencer, Ernst & Young’s Americas cleantech director, in a company statement. “However, a number [of] factors point to the continuing strength in the U.S. cleantech sector, including growth in energy efficiency investments and corporate involvement throughout multiple industries — from utilities to technology to consumer products.”

Don’t forget that you can follow us on Twitter @greensquaredcom.

Houston is #2 on the most likely to dry up list. San Antonio’s #4. Who’s #1?

Two recent reports, an October 2010 report by environmental research and sustainability group Ceres, and a July 2010 report from the National Resources Defense Council, each outlined some of the likely areas where water issues will likely have a major impact on life as its citizens know it.

The investor website, 24/7 Wall Street, then ran analysis of those reports and cross-referenced it the water supply and consumption in America’s 30 largest cities to identify potential conflicts in regions which might have disputed rights over large supplies of water and the battles that could arise from these disputes.

They then created a Top Ten list with the most acute exposure to problems which could cause large imbalances of water supply and demand.

10. Orlando, FL

The area has implemented extreme conservation measures, including aggressive water-rationing policies and lawn-watering bans. As of 2013, Orlando will no longer be able to increase the rate at which it uses water from the Floridan aquifer, the city’s main source of fresh water supply. It is estimated that water usage in the Orlando area will increase from 526 million gallons per day from 1995 to 866 million in 2020. On the city website, the mayor is quoted, saying: “Orlando Utilities Commission water usage trends show Orlando water demand exceeding the supply by approximately 2014 if no action is taken.”

9. Atlanta, GA

The crisis began when the Army Corps of Engineers released more than 20 billion gallons of water from Lake Lanier, the city’s primary source of water. The lake is the site of an ongoing legal conflict between Georgia, Alabama, and Florida, all of which rely on the reservoir for fresh water. Last year, a federal judge declared Atlanta’s withdrawals from the lake illegal, and if the ruling stands, the city will lose roughly 40% of its water supply by 2012.

8. Tuscon, AZ

6. Fort Worth, TX

As Fort Worth continues to grow, the amount of water demand has continued to exceed the amount of water available through local supply. The Tarrant Regional Water District is trying to bring in more water from Oklahoma’s Red River. Oklahoma, wishing to preserve its water sources, limits interstate water sales. Fort Worth has countered with a lawsuit, which is pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

5. San Francisco, CA

4. San Antonio, TX

The NRDC says that the area is at extremely high risk for water demand exceeding supply by 2050 if no major systematic changes are made. Legal battles over the Edwards Aquifier with surrounding areas, including Austin, TX, are ongoing.

3. Phoenix, AZ

2. Houston, TX

Throughout most of its history, the city of Houston primarily drew water from the Jasper Aquifer, located along the southeastern coast of Texas. Over the last 30 years, the city began to suffer from dramatic rises in sea level of nearly an inch a year. Geologists eventually realized that the cause was Houston’s withdrawal of fresh water from the aquifer located under the city. This discovery forced city officials to use nearby Lake Houston and Lake Conroe for municipal water instead of the aquifer. Since 2000, Houston has been the fifth-fastest-growing city in the country, and its presence in an area with high drought likelihood makes it an immediate risk for serious water shortages.

1. Los Angeles, CA

Great work by 24/7 Wall Street in putting this list together.

If there is any doubt about the severity of this issue, legendary investor T. Boone Pickens has been spending MILLIONS on water rights throughout the Southwest (note the overlap in the above list).

Now, what are we going to do about it?

According to this article, the investment will cost about $4.6 million.

That investment will generate $684,000 in revenue annually according to Ikea estimates, based primarily on the 71.3 cents a kilowatt hour feed-in tariff.

That is a good news-bad news scenario in my opinion. This solar investment has a very good simple payback of 6.72 years. The bad news is that without the feed-in tariff that this same investment would provide a 60-year payback.

Photo credit:COLIN MCCONNELL/TORONTO STAR

What about in this economy?

Prior to the recession, LEED-certified buildings enjoyed noticeably faster lease-up times and lower vacancy rates in addition to commanding higher rental premiums compared with their non-green peers.

However, currently, vacancy rates have remained relatively high for Class A LEED-certified buildings, with a national average of 37.6% compared with 25.8% for all Class A office.

Why?

Many of the new Class A office buildings that started development before the recession and came online after the economy had begun to weaken were LEED certified buildings. As a result of the economy, many new office buildings have struggled to attract tenants and have higher than average vacancy rates.

Miller then analyzed two sets of office buildings: pre-recession new builds (completed 2000-2005) and post 2005 new builds.

Pre-recession completed Class A LEED office buildings average $28.50 per square foot in rent with an average vacancy rate of 6.5%, compared with $25.89 per square foot in average rent and an average vacancy of 10.7% for all Class A office stock. That’s a 10% rent premium!

In post 2005 completed buldings, the LEED certified buildings average $33.24 per square foot compared to $30.11 per square foot for all Class A office. Again, that’s over 10% rent premium!

However, the national vacancy rate for all Class A LEED office properties was 36.4% at the end of the first quarter of 2010, compared with 31.1% for all Class A multi-tenant office property. That makes it about a push in this economy, but as the economy strengthens that rental premium will pay big long-term dividends. Plus, annual operating expenses should be less in the LEED building, tilting the balance again to green.

Don’t forget that Green Squared promotes Green that makes cents! — (i) “green”, as in environmental sustainability, and (ii) “green”, as in cost savings. That’s Green²; that’s Green Squared!

Here’s a quick run-down of several energy-efficient projects cited in the article.

Projects at Fairmont Waterfront hotel include a heat-recovery system to preheat incoming city water using heat captured from the hotel’s water system. It saves an estimated 305,380 kilowatt-hours (1,100 GJ) per year and $12,000 per year. Estimated payback is in two years.

In a separate article, Fairmont set a corporate commitment to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 20 percent from its 2006 levels by 2013.

The conference was opened by Austin Mayor Lee Leffingwell, C. Donald Babers, Regional Administrator for Region VI, U.S. HUD and Texas Public Utility Commission Chairman Barry Smitherman.

Smitherman provided some interesting Texas/ERCOT stats:

+ 1.7 million smart meters are installed as of July 31
+ 6 million will be installed by 2013
+ 9300 megawatts from wind in ERCOT footprint (900 MW more in Texas but out of ERCOT footprint)
+ 18,500 megawatts from wind in ERCOT planned by 2013 (that would be 20-25% of load)
+ There is a proposed rule for NON-WIND renewable target of 500 MW (most likely, solar)

From Dub Taylor of the State Energy Conservation Office, he provided this data of the fuel mix in Electricity in Texas for 2009:
+ Natural Gas 51%
+ Coal 34%
+ Nuclear 10%
+ Renewables (basically wind) 4%

One of the highlights of the conference, of which there were many, was the presentation by the new City of Houston Sustainablity Director, Laura Spanjian (we touched on Spanjian earlier this month on this blog here), summarizing the Houston’s achievements in sustainable growth. In March of this year the City of Houston was recognized for being ranked sixth on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 2009 list of cities with the most energy efficient buildings.

Ms. Spanjian woke the crowd up after lunch with an inspired delivery of City of Houston accomplishments.

Solar and Wind initiatives include: A 100KW solar system at George R. Brown Convention Center funded jointly by the Houston Endowment ($850k), BP ($100k) and CenterPoint ($50k) and the purchase of 2 billion kwh (50 MW of power) from Texas Wind Farms over the next 5 years. The EPA ranks the City of Houston as the #1 in terms of renewable energy purchased by a municipality.

Other energy efficiency initiatives include the LED traffic lights at 2,000 intersections which have a cost savings of $3.6M per year, the LED Streetlight Pilot Project which are up to 50% more energy efficient and 755 hybrid vehicles (the 3rd largest municipal fleet in the country). It should also be noted METRO is purchasing is purchasing 100 hybrid buses a year and will have 449 in total by 2011.

Houston is “LEED”ing the way for all new construction, as mandated in 2004, and the Looscan Library was the City’s first LEED Certified building with a LEED Gold on Central Permitting Center and Fire Station 90 not far behind. Add to all of this the Residential Program for kWh reductions, the Weatherization Program, improving air quality using MAAM and DIAL technologies and Houston is well on its way to leading the nation in energy strategies.

We applaud the new Mayor Parker and her selection of Laura Spanjian as Sustainability Director.

It was a great presentation!

By the way, the event was held at the AT&T Executive Education and Conference Center on UT’s campus. The facility is LEED Gold.

One caveat: the survey was of only 48 people who are in charge of sustainability for their companies. I think that sample size is too small. And, given these folks’ role in the organization, I am afraid their viewpoint is a bit slanted so to speak. But there are lessons to be learned.

My takeaways included:

+ “The green workforce is the general workforce.” – they believed that sustainability would be integrated into existing roles and job descriptions as a prerequisite for employability: Jobs in the future, respondents thought, will require people to bring a certain basic level of familiarity with sustainability issues and competence in skills related to sustainability to the table.

Interesting. I’ve never heard it put quite that way, but I agree with the premise wholeheartedly.

+ “Sustainable products can be competitive – with the right marketplace approach.”

Thumbs up from me.

+ “Sustainability’s bottom-line results might be better if you broaden your view of ROI.” – But to improve its performance, a company needs to do more than reap an immediate financial ROI on its sustainability initiatives. It also needs to consider managing risk, building its brand and reputation, complying with regulatory requirements, and investing in developing future products and services that will be viable in a world where sustainability plays a greater role in driving buying decisions.

There are definitely qualitative benefits that should be considered that are difficult to incllude in your CFO’s spreadsheet.

+ Primary owner of sustainability efforts? COO was 6%, Head of Environmental Health and Safety 6%, Board of Directors 4%, CFO 2%, other = 91%.

Two things: 1) It’s odd that Deloitte did not list Chief Sustainability Officer as one of the options (they were part of the others), and 2) quite obviously the multiple people selected as an owner leads to a lack of accountability, which is not good for results.

+ There is a clear lack of understanding between these sustainability owners and the ARRA funds that are available to them.

That’s bad news for policy makers and even worse news for those heading up these sustainability efforts. I would have guessed the sustainability folks would have been more aggressive in understanding the grants, tax credits, tax deductions, and rebates that are available to them and their projects.

+ Energy efficiency was the across-the-board winner as the most important environmental issue to the business.

EE rated 9 on a scale from 1 to 10 in importance and was the leader in every business sector. Wow, that’s impressive and surprising at the same time. Efficiency does not get near the publicity as other answers like alternative energy and transportation. Someone has been listening and reading this blog.

David Roth of gbNYC (Green Building in NYC) nails it with “What happened at 375 Hudson is a smashing success, but it’s also really nothing more than a pretty down-the-middle retrofit done well. It’s tough to imagine a better advertisement for green commercial retrofits than that.”

Roth continues, “This is common-sense stuff, not a revolutionary leap forward. It’s low-flow fixtures and improving fixtures, not slapping on some solar panels and hoisting a wind turbine. It is, in short, a basic green retrofit — one that happens to grade very highly in terms of LEED points and the sort of building performance metrics Energy Star measures, but not one that would be beyond the reach of most Manhattan office buildings. Which, in a way, is what makes it most extraordinary.”

Now you see why I said I love this story.

From the official press release, here are the main items which earned the LEED GOLD:

+ reduced electricity consumption by nearly 110,000 kWh per year by making changes to the HVAC and mechanical systems and installing variable frequency drives on the cooling tower fans;
+ reduced steam consumption by improving heat exchangers and making other HVAC improvements that reduced heating demand;
+ reduced annual water consumption by 1 million gallons by replacing original restroom fixtures with low flow aerators and new water closets;
+ adopted an expanded recycling program that encompassed not only office paper and waste, but batteries, electronic waste and construction debris;
+ implemented a building-wide Green Cleaning policy focusing on improving air quality and ensuring the purchase of sustainable cleaning and janitorial paper supplies.

That’s as basic as it gets…Down the middle of the fairway stuff…things that every building should do, whether they want a LEED plaque or not.

Golf clap for Tishman Speyer and main tenants Saatchi & Saatchi, Penguin Group, and Turner Construction.

Andy Smith, our Chief Engineering Officer, and Bobby Bragg, our President, will lead the discussion.

Here is the complete release: CREW DALLAS TO LEARN ABOUT GREENING EXISTING BUILDINGS.

Here is the skinny:

Topic: “Cost Effective Strategies for Greening Existing Buildings”
When: 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Wednesday, August 18
Where: Park City Club, 5956 Sherry Lane (Dallas, Texas)
Cost: $50 for pre-registered guests and $55 for walk-ins.

For more information, contact Kim Hopkins at 214/890-6490 or email khopkins@crew-dallas.org.

ABOUT CREW DALLAS

CREW Dallas (Commercial Real Estate Women) is comprised of more than 300 commercial real estate professionals affiliated nationally through membership in the CREW Network. Now celebrating its 30th Anniversary, the non-profit organization provides opportunities for networking, education, leadership development and civic/philanthropic involvement. CREW Dallas promotes the highest standards of ethics and integrity and seeks to positively influence the direction of Dallas. For more information, visit www.crew-dallas.org.

Those four are San Antonio, Austin, Houston and El Paso. The CenTex cities of Austin and San Antonio were widely regarded as the most likely candidates as Austin already is the most progressive with its green building codes and much of the push to pass the state law came out of San Antonio.

Houston, the “Oil Capital of the World”, has a recently appointed Director of Sustainability, Laura Spanjian, and she told the Texas Tribune that her city was “not going to wait” for the PACE problems to get solved. “We have set aside funds to help commercial property owners with the upfront costs of energy efficiency improvements,” she said in an e-mail. “We’re going to find another model in the short-term while the issues with PACE are being worked out.”

Kudos to Ms. Spanjian on her aggressive approach.

*******

If you have missed some of the prior discussion on PACE on this blog, I recommend the following reading:

The Case for and the Concerns of PACE Financing

What is PACE Financing?

PACE 101 video