To stabilize and eventually reduce greenhouse gas emissions is an enormous challenge that will require many new technologies, behaviors and business practices . New standards will ensure that these technological systems work together well, and provide end-users with the information they need to make informed decisions. This short post describes a few of the environmental standards initiatives that have already begun.
Conservation is the largest single opportunity for short-run improvements in energy efficiency. In both the US and Europe, “Smart Grids” are touted as a promising conservation tool. The basic idea is to add some digital intelligence to electricity meters and household appliances, so that usage can be more easily, measured, monitored and controlled. Smart Grid technology will also allow some consumers to become energy producers, by selling the excess capacity from their own solar or wind generators back to the electrical grid. In addition to providing basic tools for inter-operability and security, Smart Grid standards must be designed for usability. Experience shows that consumers are unlikely to invest in conservation unless it is extremely easy (or prices increase substantially, bringing some of the long-run savings forward into the immediate future). Andrew Updegrove provides a nice overview of Smart Grid standardization, and the US Smart Grid standards initiative has an easily accessible home page.
Environmental labeling and certification programs are another case of standardization in support of the environment. Many consumers will pay a bit more for environmentally friendly products, but cannot distinguish among options at the point of purchase. This has given rise to a number of eco-certification programs, such as Energy Star for appliances, LEED for buildings, Forest Stewardship Council certification for paper and lumber or a host of different organic food designations. For an overview of eco-labeling, see here. In some cases, such as organic food, the number of labels has grown so quickly that it may be adding to customer confusion, leading to calls for government certified labels such as USDA organic. Assessing the costs and benefits of competing certification schemes is an interesting area for standards-related research.
Finally, since this blog is primarily devoted to ICT standards, we should consider the growing problem of electronic waste. Computers and electronics contain a variety of toxic materials (which are also sometimes quite valuable). Short product life-cycles and poor systems for reclamation cause much of this material to end up in landfills. However, there is growing pressure from groups such as the Electronics Take-back Coalition to push some of the costs and logistics of reclamation back onto electronics manufacturers. This is an area where governments are becoming involved. For example, the EU recently passed the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has endorsed a set of principles for called Responsible Recycling (R2) for accreditation of electronics recyclers. If electronics manufacturers want a voice in these regulatory efforts, they will have to begin developing and adopting new standards for Green designs and more comprehensive take-back policies to facilitate recycling and component re-use.
Governments are playing an active role in all of the standardization efforts described above. However, the most critical policies have little to with the standardization process itself. The value proposition for all of these efforts depends on raising the price of carbon to a level where the private and social costs of consumption are roughly equal. When these prices are in place – and let us hope that is soon – the remarkably diverse and adaptive international standards system will begin to deliver a variety of tools for change.