ARTICLES

It's sad to take a hard look and observe the lack of any effective or comprehensive energy policy over the last 30 years, since the oil shocks of the 1970s. While energy continues to be in the headlines, the solutions proposed by both Republicans and Democrats are piecemeal, self- serving and ineffective. Listening to the hype of the “greening” of America from the “food for fuels” proponents is nonsensical. Does America suffer from Attention Deficit Disorder, experiencing too many distractions to actually contemplate long-term solutions to complex problems? Solutions require heavy lifting and don't have the immediate political pay off of a ribbon-cutting ceremony. A green initiative for wind and natural gas proposed by one self-serving billionaire doesn't cut it either. The media vortex needs grist for the mill. So, if it sounds half good, it may be worth a try. This is intellectual laziness.

Peter Fusaro is on the cover of Exec Magazine, and featured in an interview, discussing his career, work, and thoughts about the future.

I recently attended Goldman Sachs' third annual alternative energy conference in New York, along with 1,000 others. The take away is that is there is increased investor interest in the sector, but the key stumbling block is still the lack of regulatory certainty for the deployment of more capital. Public policy in the climate change arena is diffuse as a patchwork of state actions has replaced the lack of federal action on both energy and environmental issues. That's all about to change. What is imperceptible to the policy pundits is the power of the Internet to activate the polity to foment change at the grassroots. For example, today, 600 U.S. cities have taken the lead on climate change. As Al Gore stated at the Goldman Sachs event, “The world is awakening to the absolute necessity to adopt a carbon strategy.” I will add, finally, the U.S. Federal government, just not this current administration.

There is a definite lack of long-term vision on energy and environmental policy which reflects a myopic view of how the world works. Politicians are timid. They don't level with their constituents that the road to a greener and cleaner world will cost them more money. We are fed platitudes. We are told that this shortfall will all come out in the wash, magically, or by appropriations or a “carbon tax.” There is no “free lunch.” It is going to cost American consumers more in everything they do and everything they buy because de-carbonization of the U.S. economy will cost big money. Waving a magic wand will not catapult us into the Promised Land.

The underinvestment in clean energy and clean technology is mind boggling, considering the market opportunity. Capital outlays on research and development seem not to be focused on the approaching carbon constrained world and the myriad opportunities presented.

ECOSYS Capital Advisors, LLC (ECA), a Connecticut-based carbon emissions trading firm, executed the first carbon allowance compliance trade in the United States last week. The trade was completed under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a carbon cap-and-trade market comprised of ten Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States. RGGI’s caps on utility carbon emissions go into effect 01jan09.

The U.S. renewable industries have been predicated on subsidies. It seems now is the time to turn the renewable market loose from its dependence on subsidies and make the sector financially competitive. What I mean by that is that higher energy prices provide the price floor for the deployment of renewable technology, and the icing on the cake will be the generation of both renewable energy credits and carbon credits for renewable energy production.

The United Nation's IPCC released its report on climate change recently. The report more strongly asserts that man-made sources of GHG are increasing in the atmosphere. The bottom line is that man-made emissions may be changing the climate faster than many scientists had estimated. So, what can we do about it going forward for 2008 and beyond? There are both individual choices that consumers can make and there are corporate decisions that companies can make. U.S. emissions are now over seven billion metric tonnes of CO2e, and while down slightly for 2006, are still a large part of the world's carbon footprint.

You would think with all the media attention, investor interest and voter concerns about U.S. energy policy as oil nears $100 per barrel that Congress would act. Unfortunately, these legislators are having difficulties articulating a coherent national energy policy. The fig leaf of corn-based ethanol becoming the panacea for energy and environmental security has had a hard time taking off. Food prices have soared and consumers are getting socked at both the gas pump and grocery store. What will it take for Congress to act coherently and over the long-term?

Energy trading and risk management is just not the same anymore. Oil markets this fall detached themselves from the fundamentals. The reason is that the new wall of money trading global energy markets is much bigger and deeper than anyone knows, and move markets to extreme prices which are detached from basic market fundamentals of supply and demand. The market is now signaling a shortage and there isn't one. The investment in the global energy sector has attracted more diversification of investment (read global wealth) into the energy sector and exacerbated price movements. Our noble energy economists will examine this phenomenon in future years but the fact is that energy markets are changing once again and expect more price volatility to come. After all, it's volatility as well as prices that trader's trade.

The debate on climate change at the U.S. federal level is on, but the real action is now at the state level regarding greenhouse gas market design. This is not such a bad deal, as the same thing happened in SO2 (acid rain) and NOX (ozone) trading markets. The states began the process and because of all the confusion, these markets were federalized. But I think this time the states may build a better mouse trap that the federal government can emulate. With talk of up to 50 climate bills in Congress and a straw man recently raised on carbon taxes, the federal efforts are dogged by politics and special interests. To reach consensus seems many years off, despite talk of President Bush doing a “Nixon goes to China” on climate change. The real action is now at the state level for carbon market trading and finance.

California is about to embark on the creation of the world's most aggressive greenhouse gas market in the most energy efficient state in the United States. Already the state has enacted the most progressive renewable energy and demand response initiatives in the country with a Renewable Portfolio Standard of 20 percent by 2010 (which will most likely rise to 33.3 percent by 2020), a $2.9 billion solar initiative, and an accelerating demand response regime. California has also recognized that to get significant greenhouse gas reductions you must burden share among all sectors for those reductions not just electric utilities like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in the Northeast does.

It's kind of interesting that everyone is focused on cap and trade legislation and market design issues. There is another “dog in this fight.” Carbon is rising as a liability issue. While I have argued that carbon risk management is a fiduciary responsibility for both energy and agricultural companies, I think what has been missed is that there are externalities to burning coal as well as other fossil fuels. Externalities equate to rising health care liabilities, sludge and mercury liabilities, and carbon dioxide liabilities. I fully expect to see a website shortly with some trial lawyer already poking around this fertile ground for a class action suit. It's not that farfetched as we saw a California trial lawyer have a very scary website on LNG safety and siting, and we have the historical precedent of tobacco case law.

Panel Intelligence, LLC, a leader in independent primary research and a wholly owned subsidiary of MCF Corporation (AMEX: MEM), today announced that it has hired David H. Kurzman to head its Clean Technology (“CleanTech”) research group. CleanTech encompasses technologies that reduce humans’ impact on the environment, including Next-Generation EnergySM and environmental technologies...

We are now in the fourth year of the strongest energy commodity market in history and continue to see the launch of many hedge funds, each pursuing different market strategies. When we began tracking energy hedge funds in October 2004, there were 180 such funds in our universe. As of August 1st 2007, we now track 586 energy and environmental hedge funds through the Energy Hedge Fund Center...

Entering a carbon constrained world will take time because transforming the U.S. economy is very complex. Unfortunately, many Americans lack patience and expect quick fixes to our energy and environment problems. They don't exist as it took decades to create the problems and will take decades to fix them. More importantly, time is necessary to develop, deploy and scale the roll out of environmentally benign technology. California's Silicon Valley has learned that the energy and environmental crisis is not an IT solution and has now undertaken the learning curve that is necessary to understand the complexity of the world's largest business called energy. It is a $5 trillion business and will require what Enron called “iron in the ground” and advanced engineering and technology solutions which will require hundreds of billions of dollars of capital investment. The emerging carbon markets are now bringing an uplift to cleantech investment, and as a colleague in cleantech has mentioned to me carbon is the “missing link” in accelerating clean technology deployment.

CHICAGO (HedgeWorld.com)—Although the idea behind socially responsible investing—doing well by doing good—isn't new, the definition of SRI continues to incorporate new areas, the latest being global climate change.

Global energy consumption is rising, Peter Fusaro, chairman of Global Change Associates Inc. in New York, told attendees at the Managed Funds Association Forum in Chicago on Tuesday [June 12]. And that means more carbon emissions, but also a profitable investment opportunity.

Energy trading on a futures exchange began in New York with the NYMEX heating oil contract in 1978. It's almost 30 years later and energy trading is still an immature financial market. Today energy is a $5 trillion global, physical business with most companies still not hedging their price risk. Commodity trading of energy in all structures is estimated to be north of $3 trillion in notional value by our Energy Hedge Fund Center. Commodities usually trade six to twenty times the physical market so we have a long way to grow, especially with rising fossil fuel demand globally.

The global carbon-trading market is doubling in size every year, putting it on course to become one of the biggest earners for energy desks and raising the question of whether emissions trading is environmentally effective or just another revenue stream for investment banks.

The US is at an environmental crossroads on climate policy. Already, regional greenhouse gas regimes are mandated for the US Northeast and California and other western states, and the fear is that multiple environmental standards will fragment the markets. Moreover, US multinational corporations fall under the Kyoto Protocol’s greenhouse gas emissions targets in 172 nations, and under those of the EU emissions trading scheme in 27 nations. These regulatory forces, coupled with the need to deploy clean energy technology in the US, are leading to greenhouse legislation in 2007.

The global carbon-trading market is doubling in size every year, putting it on course to become one of the biggest earners for energy desks and raising the question of whether emissions trading is environmentally effective or just another revenue stream for investment banks.

The U.S. Federal government invented the concept of cap and trade by taking a financial instrument from the mortgage-backed securities market and applying it to air quality attainment for acid rain remediation. It worked. The concept was proposed by the U.S. delegation at the Rio Climate Convention in 1992 and was ironically opposed by the European Union at the time. Today, we are at a cross roads to create a very viable and effective environmental financial market for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Because this market is starting all over the world, the timing is now appropriate for the United States to lead the way once again. The real market for the abatement of CO2 and other greenhouse gases begins next January 1, 2008. The train has now arrived, and we need to get on board. We need to stop posturing that voluntary technology programs or voluntary carbon offsets will get us anywhere when see greenhouse gas emissions rising each year in the United States. They are now estimated to rise by another 19 percent over 2000 levels by 2020 according to the U.S. government. This is on top on an annual increase of about 1 percent per year since the 1990s.

In the latest expansion of a white-shoe investment firm into the Houston oil patch, Lehman Brothers investment bank announced Wednesday that it will purchase Eagle Energy Partners, a Houston-based energy services company, for an undisclosed amount.

Premier Wen Jiabao pledged Friday to help clean China's air and water and combat global warming by phasing out tax breaks and discounts on land and electricity for highly polluting industries.

Until recently, big business has insisted that emissions reductions be voluntary. What, then, converted these companies into believers in government intervention?

John Arnold sits atop what Trader Magazine calls “capitalism's ultimate honour roll,” having taken home as much as $2-billion (U.S.) last year from successful natural gas trading, some of which came at the expense of failed Canadian trader Brian Hunter.

2007 has become the breakthrough year in U.S. carbon consciousness. The realization that U.S. multinational companies fall under the Kyoto Protocol in 169 nations, coupled with state lead initiatives on both the East and West Coasts, have now crystallized Congressional attention on the issue of global warming. The recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on greenhouse gases adds a further impetus for the United States to take action on climate change this year. While there are almost as many bills as people running for president, the stark realization is that both the House and Senate do not understand how to craft legislation that shares economic burdens. Sharing the burden is only one issue. Legislation must also create economic incentives to deploy carbon reduction technologies in the markets, and create long-term federal standards on cap and trade that achieve significant carbon dioxide reductions without a price cap.

Last Tuesday afternoon, as we all enjoyed a glorious-and very unusual-warm, sunny day, energy consultant Peter C. Fusaro spoke to a full room of various graduates and undergraduates about the changing trend in energy policy, new green financial markets, and job opportunities cutting the national "carbon footprint".

As 2007 has begun to roll along, I am experiencing a bit of a carbon trading snowball. Having preached the value of "green trading" for over a decade, it is somewhat of a surreal experience to be "discovered." What I have basically been saying is there cannot be dual environmental standards for the United States and the rest of the world. That message has arrived in 2007! The calls are from the airlines, nanotechnologists, headhunters, cleantech venture capital, hedge funds, private equity, Europeans, the Japanese, and others. They all want to know what is carbon trading and finance? How will that impact my business? What should I be doing about it? Where is government regulation in this arena?

While predictions of rising oceans and melting ice caps provide some incentive, the almighty dollar may prove to be a more powerful force in setting up a multi billion dollar marketplace to trade carbon emission credits as a way to reduce climate-warming air pollution.

Talk about green - experts predict that carbon trading in the U.S. would surpass the $25 billion market in Europe and then mushroom into a derivatives market with a much greater value.

THE U.S. CLIMATE Action Partnership sounds like an improbable alliance. Ten industry giants — with business operations spanning the utilities, manufacturing, chemicals and financial-services sectors — joined forces with four environmental groups to pressure the Bush administration to set mandatory limits on carbon dioxide emissions. The coalition is aiming to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by 10% to 30% over the next 15 years.

The new Congress has raised the expectation bar, unfortunately, with the same fuzzy thinking. Quick fit artists are back. Ethanol is not a panacea for energy security or energy dependence. Raising the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) to 15 billion gallons gives us an E10 world, and not much energy savings or environmental benefit. Corn-based ethanol is highly inefficient and does little to help the United States fix its habit to foreign oil. Food for fuels is another problem area both ethically and economically.

I recently spoke on the new green business model (also see IssueAlert®, July 11, 2005, "The New Business Model for the Green Space") at the Triple Bottom Line Conference in Paris. The Triple Bottom Line is something that is accelerating in its movement into corporate world, and clean energy or clean technology resonates very well in this community. Being a European conference, the overwhelming emphasis on the conference, besides corporate governance issues, was climate change. Obviously, as the world enters a carbon-constrained world in coming decades, we will see more clean technology enter the energy markets driven by technology shift, higher energy prices and rising environmental imperatives. The fiduciary responsibilities on climate change are now changing as part of good environmental corporate governance.

I recently had the pleasure of speaking and chairing the green trading panel at the Cleantech Venture Forum (www.cleantech.com) in New York. There was quite a bit of interest in how SO2, NOX, CO2 and Recs were related to clean technology projects. These are very good issues to dive into, since the regulations on both emissions trading and renewable portfolio standards are quite confusing to investors. They are actually more confusing on CO2 reduction and renewable energy due to the lack of the federal standards on both. However, it seems kind of obvious to most cleantech investors that we are entering a carbon constrained world and that their venture capital investments in clean technology will have an environmental kicker at some juncture in the United States and in 2008 in the Kyoto world. The question then becomes, "How is this related to carbon finance and carbon offsets and more importantly investment in the realm of clean energy and cleaner technology?"

Generally U.S. companies developing renewable energy projects may be able to set-up and obtain Renewable Energy Credits (RECs), which is the prevalent offset crediting mechanism in many states. In the United States, there is no national mandated carbon offset program, although there are several initiatives for mandatory programs being developed such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) by seven North Eastern States and the recent California Global Warming Bill. These mandatory programs are not yet fully operative.

White House officials met behind closed doors with key Wall Street executives in New York City Aug. 21 to discuss the financial community’s increasingly vocal calls for a nationally regulated carbon market.

Click the link to read the article (page 6)

Energy related environmental or 'green' investment opportunities are in the initial stages of market development and present a host of new global investment opportunitiesin areas such as emissions, carbon finance, clean technology and renewable energy.

In recent months, I have been speaking and meeting with many folks who are chasing the dream of green. That is green in money and environmental sustainability. Clearly, there is a knowledge gap which needs to be breached. Wall Street banks still don't adequately cover the sector, although they do cover the ethanol roll ups and solar IPO deals. Research is spotty, at best.

Contrarians are usually right. They don't follow the crowd, nor do they follow conventional wisdom. Most change is made by contrarians. Just when everyone thought we would have to wait another five years for U.S. action on climate change legislation, action is now taking place at the federal level. Although it won't be this year when the focus is still on red and blue states, green is the color of next year. It will be bipartisan, It will be a real reduction. And it will have industry hollering that it can't make the deadline.

I recently had the pleasure of presenting at the annual Environmental Financial Workshop in Toronto where private equity, green building developers, and several Canadian venture capital clean tech funds presented. One great overview, which I will share in this IssueAlert® was Nick Parker's presentation on Cleantech investment patterns. Nick not only coined the term "cleantech" (it could have been greentech, he noted) but also founded the Cleantech Venture Network which is the best resource on the Web for information and networking in the space (www.cleantech.com). Nick feels that clean tech is now a “smart industrial revolution” as a next wave of venture innovation.

Those attending an event known as the Green Trading Summit in midtown this month had two unshakeable convictions, one backed by science, the other by finance: Global warming is doing damage to the environment, and efforts to reduce its severity have proven lucrative; green, they say, is gold -- everywhere (so far) but here.

The US needs standardisation of renewable energy credits (RECs) in order to stimulate the growth of alternative energy, an environmental markets conference in New York was told on Tuesday.

Environmental, economic and national security concerns are seen working together to create a big US market for using carbon dioxide (CO2) to increase oil production.

US financial firms expect to see national carbon regulation in the near future and say the climate change issue is rising up the agenda among investors.

As we enter year three of the greatest commodity bull market of all time, higher and sustained energy prices are pushing clean technologies and other green investment opportunities into the foreground. While perhaps not meeting some traditional investment metrics, this emerging sector is nonetheless now beginning to attract institutional and other investors. Much of this interest is of course due to the impact of high energy prices, but an equally compelling market driver is the acceptance that environmental responsibility is a rising global issue for both corporations and governments.

I recently had the pleasure of once again looking at the commercial future of solar power at Piper Jaffray's “Opportunities in Solar and Clean-Tech Symposium” in New York last week. 19 public and private companies presented their business models to the New York crowd of savvy investors. The bottom line is that the market may be ahead of itself. The stock equities look fairly valued. The science needs to get better, i.e., read "more efficient." No major scientific breakthroughs appear on the horizon, but the good news is that this a global market that is awakening. In fact, it may be the beginning of a global "mega trend" in renewable energy sustained by higher oil and gas prices, rising concerns over the environment, and public policy mandates. To put this into some context, it should also be remembered that solar accounts for 0.1 percent of global energy markets but has been growing at up to 40 percent per year. Growing from a small installed base, it is rising rapidly. Projections are that the global solar market will be $30 to $40 billion market by 2014, according to some estimates. It will be a less incentivized market, and is poised to enter the global power markets which are $1 trillion in size.

The third year of sustained higher energy prices has finally convinced investors that higher energy prices are here to stay. This acknowledgement is igniting the clean technology sector as environmental issues are also pushing forward. In fact, energy and environment are now fused as an emerging investment sector. Its outcomes cannot be charted, but it is helpful to understand the investment parameters and dynamics of this new sector.

We need to get down to the hard work of rebuilding America's energy infrastructure.

As a spin-off of the fourth Green Trading Summit, Fusaro asked Colin High, vice president of Resource Systems Group and a summit speaker, to give a May 3, 2005, talk before the Academy's Environmental Sciences Section. High's subject was an innovative, market-based regulatory compliance project conducted under the federal Clean Air Act. Fusaro framed High's talk with opening remarks on the subject of green trading markets.

The author's conservative estimates put the number of commodity trading hedge funds at 110 with perhaps $50 billion or more in total assetts under management, out of the universe of over 400 energy hedge funds. Eighteen months ago, the number of funds stood at just 10. While energy funds make up apprximately only 5% of the global hedge fund market, their exponential growth and investors' continual search for better returns means the sector is attracting global attnetion. This article looks at the development of the sector and the unique risks involved.

A number of specialised investment and financing vehicles have emerged in the energy and environmental markets. Some to replace old incumbents and others to take advantage of new markets and new investment opportunities.

The recent run up in crude, gasoline, heating oil and natural gas are harbingers of the future.

Now is the time for us to question this country's lack of a comprehensive energy strategy.

green trading and green finance have converged to bring forth a new business model for the green sector.

Pollution quotas created for the regulation of environmental plagues—including acid rain, urban smog and greenhouse gases—have given rise to a market that could in time rival the trading in major commodities.

Peter Fusaro and Dr Gary Vasey, following up on the article contributed by Nedia Miller in Pipeline 44, discuss the substantial potential significance of the hedge funds on energy markets.

The U.S. is still well positioned to lead on environmental financial market development with its entrepreneurial culture, risk capital and knowledge base in trading.

Green Trading is a term coined several years ago to capture the value of the convergence of the capital markets and the environment. Peter C. Fusaro, Global Change Associates Inc., who originated the term “Green Trading”, provides an overview of its benefits and how it can lead to a cleaner environment.

Why are hedge funds now attracted to the energy industry? One reason is that hedge-fund returns have disappointed investors over the last year, and the funds are seeking new areas of investment where returns may be better. The volatile world of energy is seen by the funds as potentially providing such an opportunity.

Contrary to what many believe in Europe because of the inordinate amount of press attention on the modest Kyoto Protocol, environmental financial risk is rising as an issue in corporate America.

Download this chapter from Peter Fusaro's book Green Trading Markets: The Second Wave.

Our continuing research into the secretive world of energy hedge funds is revealing evidence of a next wave of interest in Europe as well as an extension of the commodity trading platform into green markets.

The authors share what they learned about the current state of oil markets and trading in particular during Institute of Petroleum Week, an annual oil and gas forum in London.

The debate that will decide the next round of changes in emissions limits has started.

When it comes to the Bush administration's Clear Skies Initiative, another two-term Republican president said it best: There you go again.

Putting a lid on carbon dioxide emissions thought to cause global warming is a daunting task. Even though the Kyoto Protocol has yet to take effect, three nations are planning to build 850 new coal plants that would increase such emissions by a factor of five.

The commencement of carbon dioxide (CO2) trading in Europe and the recent run-up in prices in the United States for sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission credits have contributed greatly to renewed attention to the value and effectiveness of the use of emission credits.

Over recent months, there has been much discussion around energy price volatility and the presence of speculators a.k.a. hedge funds. We believe that there is little or no evidence that speculation by hedge funds is the primary factor at work.

Superconductors are still an evolving field of science and technology. While they have been put to some use, their potentially greatest use as electrical conductors has not been fully realized.

Until recently, energy trading and risk management was basically a “cottage industry” comprised of energy companies and banks engaged in energy project finance. But all that is changing.

A discussion of the present state and future of nanotechnology.

Hedge funds have been rumoured to be influencing energy prices for over a decade now but most of that was just market hype. This year, we have seen the real thing with the entrance of numerous hedge funds into energy commodity trading.

Environmental financial risk is rising as an issue in corporate America as well as throughout the world. Companies are beginning to analyze their risk and realize that there is a global issue and that they have got to do something about it.

Environmental financial risk is rising as an issue in corporate America. The issues of environmental financial liabilities and the emergence of climate change risk have made companies extremely nervous about proceeding forward in market development with such near term uncertainty.

It has been more than two years since the collapse of the industry's merchant segment, but the energy commodities trading markets have just recovered. Now, liquidity and market making is being provided by a surprising source, energy hedge funds, and is putting energy trading back on the scene.

Speculative energy trading has a strong future but it will not be the traditional utilities and energy merchants that will underpin the market.

Energy trading is no longer the domain of just any energy company; energy trading has entered the world of big-time, big-stakes trading.

The time is now for a rapid acceleration in energy trading and risk management throughout the region.

Peter Fusaro considers the growing concern over environmental issues and argues that a new and significant green trading global market is emerging.

Speculative energy trading has a strong future, but it will not be the traditional utilities and energy merchants that will create and maturate that market.

For many in the energy industry, trading has become a dirty word inferring a speculative approach to make money in energy markets. In fact, many would point to the failure of the mega-merchant model as evidence that speculative energy trading has no real future. However, according to Peter Fusaro, Chairman of Global Change Associates, speculative energy trading has a strong future but, it will not be the traditional utilities and energy merchants that will create and maturate that market.

While the environmental results of the dispute over global warming may not be clear for years, some economic consequences are already apparent.

Peter Fusaro explains why 2005 will be the breakthrough year for green trading.

Peter Fusaro discusses the importance of energy risk management in light of Asia Pacific's expanding needs and governmental policy changes.

Peter C. Fusaro, Chairman of Global Change Associates examines the financial risks and opportunities inherent in the
growing awareness of environmental damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

Download this chapter from Peter Fusaro's book Energy Convergence: The Beginning of the Multi-Commodity Market.

Several experts from different sectors of the industry, including Peter Fusaro, attempt to answer questions pertaining to the future of credit risk management.

The Calgary Herald interviews Peter Fusaro about the economic feasability of Canada joining the Kyoto Treaty.

This paper summarizes the ongoing developments of the green trading markets for greenhouse gases (GHGs), renewable energy credits, and the financial value of energy efficiency.

The events at Enron created the financial black hole that is now consuming Dyegy, Reliant, Mirant, Williams, Aquila, Calpine and AES. It's a relentless cancer that even now is spreading to the majors. What went wrong?

There's nothing wrong with the current technology, and despite the current liquidity problems the market is viable. But energy trading is still a personal game, and you can't play golf with a computer.

The recent environmental summit in South Africa has highlighted the fact that there is no better time to develop a global green energy market.

The growing awareness of the benefits of green trading has called for and enticed expansion into greenhouse gas, renewable energy, and energy efficiency.