Here's a new sales pitch from spam-blocking champion McAfee Inc. — unwanted junk email doesn't only waste massive amounts of time, it wastes massive amounts of electricity as well. 

A study by McAfee and consulting firm ICF International reported Wednesday that the 62 trillion spam emails or so sent last year cost the planet 33 terawatt-hours of power. That's 33 billion megawatt hours, enough to power 2.4 million homes every year, and represents a greenhouse gas emission equivalent of 33 million cars, the report says.

About a fifth of a typical business's 50 megawatt-hours of power used each year to manage email can be attributed to spam, the report went on. And here's the sales pitch — spam filtering already saves a whopping 135 terawatt-hours of power each year, and having a spam filter on every in-box could cut that wasted 33 terawatt-hours by 75 percent.

Whether or not any spammers emerge with their own counter-study, McAfee's report does underscore the growing energy appetite of the world's information technology industry and its users.

The power consumed by the world's IT and telecommunications industries accounts for about 2 percent of the world's greenhouse-gas emissions, according to a 2007 report from Gartner. That's as much as the world's aviation industry.

That's led to a big push from IT and electronics companies promoting more energy-efficient and environmentally friendly products and services. New groups like the Climate Savers Computing Initiative are calling for improved energy efficiency in the IT sector, and new ways to reduce power used by personal computers are all the rage (see Verdiem's Next Frontier: The Phone, Cisco Jumps Into Energy Management for Computers, Buildings).

Data center operators are also hot to cut power for an industry that already consumes about 1.5 percent of U.S. electricity (see GE Looks to Data Center Efficiency, Sun: Data Center Efficiency for Everyone and Advanced Data Centers Claims Super-Efficiency).

And consumer electronics makers are touting their latest energy-efficient products, sometimes under regulatory duress (see CES Plugs Green Technology, Venture Power in Japan: Green Electronics and California Wants to Cut TV Power by 49% in Four Years).

Of course, there can be controversy when converting IT power usage to greenhouse-gas emission estimates, as happened in January when Google was accused in a Times of London story of causing 7 grams of carbon dioxide to be released into the atmosphere with every search. The real figure is closer to two-tenths of a gram, Google said (see Google CO2 Claim Throws CO2Stats Into Limelight).

More bloggage from Greentech Media's sold-out solar event in Arizona --

The first panel of today was focused on Arizona and what this sun-drenched state is doing to promote solar.

We heard two very different stories.  Solar City loves Arizona -- favorable incentives and lots of sun.  Advent Solar, on the other hand, despite being helmed by an Arizona resident, builds its product in New Mexico.

Lyndon Rive, the CEO of installer, designer, and financier Solar City bemoaned the lack of solar installations in the U.S.: "There have been 60,000 solar systems installed in the US in the last 30 years -- it's nothing!  There's been a lot of money and a lot of entrepreneurs but not much focus on delivery."  He added that, "Our mission is to bring solar to millions of rooftops."

Solar City covers Arizona, California, and Oregon and, not surprisingly, the biggest barrier to adoption is upfront cost, according to Rive.

When confronted with a $20,000 upfront cost most consumers become somewhat less environmentally concerned.  That's why Solar City has adopted a financing model that significantly reduces the upfront cost.  It is partnering with banks that have a tax appetite.  But a 30 percent tax credit is only effective if you are a profitable entity.

The Stimulus Bill changed the tax credit to a grant.  "The only problem is the delay in getting it out." according to Rive who sees it delayed until July and that will result in a slow first half of 2009.

"There is still a tremendous interest in the venture community. But the problem is if you're an entrepreneur -- whatever you think you're worth divide that by two or by three."

He finished by saying, "We need economies of scale.  That makes everything more efficient -- permitting, customer acquisition, etc."

Peter Green is the CEO of Advent Solar, a manufacturer of high-efficiency c-Si solar cells.  It was founded in New Mexico because the technology came from Sandia Labs in 2002.  Green joined in 2007 and he commutes to New Mexico daily.

Green believes that "there aren't many companies in the U.S. breaking new ground like we are."

He is currently in negotiation with a number of states to determine where to locate his manufacturing.  He "looks for infrastructure, talent and research institutions he can lean on.   The fourth thing he looks for are incentives but but he is finding that Arizona "is at the bottom."  because he needs cash and the powers that be in Arizona told him that they don't believe in cash.  He called it a "perishable opportunity" -- Arizona has to seize it now.

He added that he knows of some well-founded rumors indicating that: "You're going to see a lot of large companies buy a number of small companies in the near future."

Arizona looks to have the demand side of the solar equation under control but needs more attention to building its' manufacturing base.

John Holdren, President Obama’s top scientist, presented the cold, hard facts about global warming to a receptive audience at this week’s Clean Power: Building a New Clean Energy Economy forum at MIT. “We are experiencing dangerous human interference now. Bigger disruptions are coming,” he said.

Tackling climate change will take more than an Apollo project and more than a Manhattan project, he said. I can’t say I’m confident we’ll see anything on that scale.

During a post-forum press conference, MIT President Susan Hockfield noted that the National Institutes of Health have a $30 billion-a-year budget, and that level of funding has helped us pull off major revolutions in healthcare over the last 30 years. But today’s budget for energy research is at best $4 billion per year, she said.

The forum focused mostly on policy, however.

Rep. Edward Markey, cosponsor of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (a.k.a. the Waxman-Markey Bill), was ringmaster at yesterday’s event. The bill is the first draft of legislation aimed at setting a course for dealing with climate change. The forum gave Markey and the administration, represented by the president’s assistant for energy and climate change Carol Browner, an opportunity to rally the loyalists for the fight ahead in Washington.

The room was filled with major Massachusetts stakeholders in the green economy: energy startup executives, state and local officials, and MIT leadership. Not to suggest that everyone in the room was thrilled with the Waxman-Markey Bill — judging from the questions and murmurs in the room many were not.

A major point of concern is the as-yet-undetermined number of carbon credits that’ll be given away rather than auctioned off in the cap-and-trade carbon emissions portion of the bill. Obama had initially declared that 100 percent of the credits would be auctioned, but has backed off that position. Fully auctioning the credits remains in the picture but as a long-term goal, Markey said.

The cap-and-trade scheme coming out of Washington is beginning to resemble the European approach, which didn’t start off too well, but the folks from Washington are making a point of saying that they’ve learned from Europe’s mistakes. Both Markey today and Rep. Jay Inslee at the MIT Energy Conference last month used the line that sometimes it’s better to be second, suggesting a common set of talking points. (Who says Democrats can’t maintain message discipline?)

Who gets what out of the cap-and-trade system is still under discussion, but Markey said the first priority is trade-sensitive industries. At the press conference, he said he’d ultimately like to see international agreement on a sector-by-sector basis, and he gave steel as an example.

Not surprisingly, there wasn’t any discussion of the six-year window in the bill for new coal plants to come online without having to meet the new emissions standards until 2025, as highlighted by the Wall Street Journal’s Keith Johnson.

I also didn’t hear the phrase “carbon tax” at any point, and Markey and Browner avoided a question about raising the federal gas tax.

Still, Markey and Browner made some positive noises and left the impression that the administration and its Congressional allies are committed to the fight. It’ll be interesting to see if the administration treats what’s likely to be a flawed outcome as a first step or if they take what they can get, declare victory and turn their attention elsewhere.

Stay tuned for more: hearings on the Waxman-Markey Bill begin a week from today, launching what is likely to be a contentious process of forging a national climate and energy policy.

Eric Smalley is the editor of Energy Research News. He has written about technology since 1987 and has freelanced for many publications including Discover, Scientific American, Wired News and The Boston Globe on topics ranging from quantum cryptography to global warming.

A123 Systems isn't the only advanced battery manufacturer getting millions of dollars in refundable state tax credits to tempt them to set up shop in the beleaguered state of Michigan (see A123 Lands $100M in Tax Credits).

The state is giving a total of $543.5 million in tax credits to four companies. Lithium-ion battery maker A123 is to receive a battery cell tax credit of $100 million over four years, plus a $25.2 million high-tech state tax credit over the next 15 years.

The remaining three recipients each received a similar $100 million in battery cell tax credits over four years, plus varying amounts of 15-year tax credits to make up their total haul.

A consortium consisting of the U.S. battery maker Johnson Controls and French battery maker Saft will receive $148.5 million in tax credits, and KD Advanced Battery Group — a consortium of The Dow Chemical Corp., Kokam America Inc. and Townsend Ventures — will receive $146.6 million in tax credits.

And Korean battery maker LG Chem and its U.S. subsidiary Compact Power will receive $125.2 million in tax credits.

LG Chem beat out A123 for contract to make battery cells for General Motors' upcoming Chevy Volt plug-in hybrid, although A123 has landed a deal to design cells for Chrysler's upcoming line of electric hybrid vehicles (see With General Motors Snub, Is A123 Systems on the Ropes? and A123 Inks Battery Deal with Chrysler).

The four companies have pledged to invest a combined $1.7 billion in new lithium-ion battery factories in the state, and Michigan is hoping its support will help them land part of the $2 billion set aside for advanced battery manufacturing in the federal stimulus package (see Obama Signs Stimulus Package).