Greenbang likes this story a lot. She would even go so far as to say “Moi, j’aime cet article”, mainly because she wants to show off her French GCSE. The story that prompts this educational grandstanding comes courtesty of The Observer: French winemakers are turning to water transport rather than road to cut the emissions associated with shipping their products. And good on them for that, Greenbang says.
The Observer says that later on this month, 60,000 bottles of sweet sweet vin from Languedoc will be brought by boat to Ireland, and in the future, more could be gently punted off to Bristol, Manchester and even Canada. And there’s more:
The three-mast barque Belem, which was launched in 1896, the last French merchant sailing vessel to be built, will sail into Dublin following a voyage from Bordeaux that should last about four days. The wines will be delivered to Bordeaux by barge using the Canal du Midi and Canal du Garonne, which run across southern France from Sète in the east, via Béziers in Languedoc. Each bottle will be labelled: ‘Carried by sailing ship, a better deal for the planet.’ Although the whole process will end up taking up to a week longer than a flight, it is estimated it will save 4.9oz of carbon per bottle.
Greenbang feels a Jean de Florette style warm and fuzzy glow just from this news. Ah, c’est bon, non?
Greenbang has been spending some quality time with Philips’ latest CSR report. The dirty great tome reveals that the Netherlands’ second best export after Edam plans to double the money it’s ploughing into “green innovations” to €1 billion over the next five years.
And why announce one green target when you can have three? Here’s the others: to generate 30 percent of its revenue from green products and to increase energy efficiency by 25 percent, both by 2012.
It’s already making progress towards its 30 percent target: it’s on 20 percent at the moment, up from 15 percent in 2006.
It’s showing more greenery than ever in three business units: sales of green products are up 35 percent in healthcare, 91 percent in consumer lifestyle and 17 percent in lighting.
Here’s a couple of ideas from the company on what they’ve been up to:
The Philips MRI scanner Achieva 3.0T X-series for instance shows a reduction of the environmental impact of the product by 32% compared to previous models. A new market introduction that has also proven its green credentials is the Philips IntelliVue MMS X2 Patient Monitor that consumes 52% less energy during use.[…]
the Cineos Soundbar with Ambisound, which uses 50% less energy than its closest competitor, and the energy efficient LCD TV range of which some models use 36% less energy than closest competitors.
Philips Green Products offer a significant environmental improvement in one or more of the Philips Green Focal Areas: energy efficiency, packaging, hazardous substances, weight, recycling and disposal, and lifetime reliability, compared to similar products on the market.
By Graham Palmer, Chair of the Intellect Energy and Environment Group and UK and Ireland Country Manager for Intel Corporation
In a world beset with overconsumption, environmental degradation, global warming, growing resource scarcity, and social change, humanity is facing its greatest challenge ever. Doing more with less is vitally important if we are to responsibly manage our finite resources and continue to grow our economies.
With environmental challenges facing all of us, now is the time for governments, business, industry, environmental organisations, and individuals to join together in solutions to create a sustainable world for this generation and those that follow.
As a fast-paced industry itself, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has a role to play in tackling these global challenges head on and we must take communal responsibility for their resolution. The need to adopt a holistic approach is required, to encompass everything from development and production to policy and recycling. It is for this reason that the Energy and Environment Group was formed within Intellect, to provide leadership and drive innovation throughout the ICT industry.
Fortunately, the ICT sector is accustomed to moving rapidly. This makes our industry well poised to swiftly contribute to the development of a wide range of solutions to reducing global warming and improving energy efficiency, as well as empowering sustainable economic growth, productivity and job creation.
The UK Intellect Energy and Environment Group recently published a report to drive ICT contribution to sustainability. It highlights four principle areas of development, namely:
1. To understand where we are today through effective measuring and monitoring and further research into the impact of ICT on climate change
2. The need for a reduced carbon footprint created by the global and UK ICT industry. This includes adopting changes at the global, corporate and product level, for example optimising companies’ supply chains
3. Continued innovation in the development of technology solutions to improve energy efficiency
4. The need to educate consumers on behavioural changes that could benefit climate change through better ICT use
Corporate responsibility begins at home
The place to start tackling these problems is close to home.
The members of the Energy and Environment Group are organisations concerned with the impact that ICT has on climate change. As a group we are committed to driving the efforts of individual organisations to reduce carbon footprint and promote innovation in more energy efficient ICT, and make it a national and industry-wide movement.
My own organisation, Intel has a publicly stated goal to reduce its energy consumption by more than 30 percent by 2010 while driving innovation in our products to deliver increasing performance and reduced energy consumption to all our customers. As such, last year we announced a number of initiatives including the formation of the Climate Savers Computing Initiative in conjunction with WWF and Google, to help promote these changes. Other members of the group have similarly stated goals, but more importantly we all realise that doing these things alone is not enough. We must allow others to take advantage of our experiences, provide advice on the improvements we have found and work together to drive the creation of new innovations more rapidly.
From words to action
Of course one report is not going to change the way the industry behaves but it does provide a statement of intent. We need to turn these four areas of development into concerted action, and we have already begun, working with Warwick University to further research in the area. It is incumbent on all of us to take action, however, now is the time to work together, as a community.
Our pals at the Matter Network sent us this interview with sustainability expert George Kehler.
Is it Greenbang, or does he look a bit like the movie and dance man Patrick Swayze?
George Kehler has 15 years of managing energy resources and setting energy policy. While working for Dow Chemical he oversaw efforts to reduce the company’s energy bill and purchased renewable energy assets. Now, as Director of Sustainability and Carbon Management, at expense management company Cadence Network, he works with clients on their sustainability and carbon reduction initiatives. He spoke with Matter Network about large corporation’s varying viewpoints on sustainability and strategies for simultaneously reducing emissions and costs.
Matter Network: When you were working at Dow Chemical the company joined a group that was purchasing green energy. Why?
GK: Dow is a large energy consumer…. [we recognized that] the economy is driven by hydrocarbon energy and that there are a finite amount of hydrocarbons left at a reasonable price. The forecasts said that oil energy will be peaking between 2010 and 2020 and will only get more costly. Also, the amount of CO2 that is being produced and our constantly consuming fossil fuels is not a sustainable action for a big energy consumer like Dow or for the world at large.
If you are looking at increasing shareholder value, it is not just the profits that you make — it also has to do with stock price. Companies that are admired may be more attractive to certain investors.
MN: How does investing in renewable energy today line up with a corporation’s shareholder interest?
GK: Wind is pretty darn close compared to fossil fuels as an energy source in a lot of areas. Solar energy cost has significantly dropped, but it is still clearly more expensive. At face value they may not be cost effective, but through rebate programs and tax incentives, and when you start to go through a true financial analysis and have accelerated depreciation, you can make the case for wind and solar. Because of these tax breaks you can start bringing down the cost to where from a shareholder value perspective, it is cost effective.
MN: Is there additional business value for companies that are viewed as being sustainable?
GK: Being admired will have an impact on a corporation. Fortune magazine did a survey and found that of the top 10 most admired U.S. companies, 7 have written sustainability or corporate responsibility reports. None of bottom 10 produced these reports. If you are looking at increasing shareholder value, it is not just the profits that you make — it also has to do with stock price. Companies that are admired may be more attractive to certain investors. Also a college kid might be more likely to consider working for an admired company, so they will attract more talent. Forward thinking companies understand that [being admired for sustainability] has value.
MN:: How does the risk of fluctuating energy prices factor into a company’s cost assessment?
GK:: Risk is a factor for estimating energy expense. With wind most of the cost is in the capital to install a tower and turbine. When you buy power from a wind farm you can fix your price, with perhaps a slight escalation. Oil prices change almost minute by minute. Companies looking at long term power costs can commit to long term investment. But interest in long term commitment depends on the customer. It is influenced by what they think will happen in the marketplace. If you believe that energy prices will drop, you don’t want to commit to energy costs today. Each company has different perspective — some may want to fix 50 percent of their energy cost to reduce variability.
MN:: Why are companies paying more attention to sustainability than in years past?
GK:: Energy is no longer cheap, and it is having a huge impact on many companies. Since 2000 oil has gone from $20 per barrel to more than $90. A lot of companies are bringing back the technology that was originally developed in the 1970’s with new twists and turns. There is a huge drive for energy efficiency at many organizations, and they are pushing for it in Washington D.C. They recognize that not consuming a kilowatt of power is much cheaper than trying to produce an extra kilowatt.
MN: What is typical reason for companies to resist measuring their sustainability?
GK: The two biggest issues are cost and time. Some people within companies work very hard to get management to agree, but unless we get senior management to buy in, it is tough to push something through. Fortunately, it is becoming quite common for senior management to be discussing sustainability. It is becoming ingrained in the board room. The toughest challenge in working with some clients is the upfront cost — sometimes you have to spend money to make money. Also, taking the time to look at their carbon footprint is a cost. For companies, it comes down to “Do you want to be proactive or reactive?”
MN: How likely is it that the federal government will institute a carbon cap and trade system, and how is it factoring into your recommendations?
GK:: California’s climate change initiatives have made people deal with this issue. I don’t believe federal legislation will happen in 2008, but expect it in 2009 with a new president and a new congress. Various bills are being discussed and introduced. We’ve clearly passed the tipping point — it’s not a question of if but when for a carbon cap system. Companies today have two choices, wait and do nothing until you see the legislation and then react, or they can react now and understand what their carbon emission position is so that they are prepared to respond as legislation rolls out.
MN:: What are companies doing with the money that they are saving through energy efficiency?
GK:: Some companies take some of those savings and use it to understand the carbon footprint, while others will use it to buy renewable energy if it costs more. It is a forward thinking thing to do for those companies.
If Greenbang were a CEO of a major company, she would spend a lot of time chomping on a cigar, swinging around in her high-backed leather wheely chair and gazing out of her window, saying “soon all this will be mine!” and then cackling maniacally and then taking over a small family business.
Apparently, if Greenbang were a CEO, her definition of sustainability would have a lot to do with improving energy efficiency, according to a new report by the Economist Intelligence Unit.
33 percent of senior executives ranked “improving energy efficiency across global operations” as a major priority, and 19 percent ranked it as the leading priority, the report said, while 36 percent ranked “improving the local environment around operating facilities” as a major priority, and 14 percent ranked it as the leading priority. Meanwhile, 26 percent ranked “reducing greenhouse gas emissions and/or waste/pollutants as a major priority, and 13 percent ranked it as the
top priority.
And guess what? CEOs love talking about their sustainability, the report says. Here’s a snippet:
The “leading priority” selected by the most CEOs is also addressed through real estate operations, albeit less obviously. Thirty-seven percent ranked “communicating performance on sustainability to investors and stakeholders” as a major priority, and 24 percent ranked it as the leading priority. Responses to another question show that 36 percent of CEOs view “difficulty in developing targets, measures and controls required to entrench sustainable priorities within the organization” as a leading barrier to progress in sustainability.
A friend of Greenbang’s maintains he can tell the difference between Pepsi and Coke. Not only that, but he can also tell the difference in taste between Pepsi from a can and from a bottle and even what region the Pepsi came from. Mind you, that friend did also maintain that the crumpet was a seasonal food, subject to annual migrations, so judge for yourself how reliable he is. Greenbang will be putting said connoisseur to the taste test soon to see if he tell the difference in taste between solar powered and normal Pepsi.
For the Pepsi Bottling Group has been showcasing its environmental credentials this week, revealing to Associated Press it’s got a new solar gig up and running in its Eugene plat.
The company says it is the second-largest system of that type in the Pacific Northwest.
The 250-kilowatt system is expected to generate 100 million kilowatt hours of energy during the next 35 years. That’s equal to the average amount of energy consumed by 21 Eugene homes during that same time period.
Bottlers of the fizzy brown stuff announced a shedload of other eco-initiatives last year. Here’s a couple of highlight:
— PBG reduces water usage through the application of innovative design and technology, thereby conserving millions of gallons per year.
– PBG is embarking on an initiative to more efficiently manage its delivery routes. This will mean fewer trucks on the road and decreased emissions.
– The water bottles produced by PBG weigh 14-22% less today (depending on size) than they did just three years ago. In partnership with other Pepsi bottlers, the weight reductions on Aquafina bottles alone save 35 million pounds of plastic annually.
– PBG recycles tons of materials in its production facilities, and is expanding its efforts to increase recycling rates on items including corrugate, shrink wrap, and electronic equipment. To help accomplish this goal, the Company is developing partnerships with national recycling vendors to help identify recycling opportunities and create best practices. More than 77% of the waste produced by PBG plants is currently recycled.
If you want greener goods, do you have to flash the cash? Not necessarily, Wal-Mart’s director of sustainability reckons. Says the fella on Reuters:
“Bad quality products create waste, and so having tighter standards on the social side, on the environmental side and on the quality side will reduce waste,” Matt Kistler, Wal-Mart’s senior vice president of sustainability, said in an interview.[…]
“We are looking at a very small amount of dollars and the savings in the supply chain that we are finding because of sustainability in some cases will more than offset the incremental costs of what we are paying for a better quality item.”
Being the behemoth that it is, Wal-Mart has to do very little to have a big impact. It’s mandating its suppliers cut back packaging by five percent by 2013 and saved itself a shedload of cash in the process. Let’s hope some of that gets passed onto consumers - what better way to stoke enthusiasm for sustainability?
Ken Livingstone will have to go a long way to apologise to the world for his part in a series of adverts promoting cheese back in the heady brace and leg warmer wearing 1980s. Back then, he was pushing red leicester, trading on his Red Ken nickname. Now he’s more like Green Ken, with a truckload of eco-biz announcements exiting City Hall this week.
First off, the Mayor will be holding a meeting on zero carbon developments for London, off the back of the first such development called Gallions Park, and whether London can house a few more.
Then there’s more plans for cycle hire to take a little more off London’s carbon emissions and an extra £25 a day fee for Chelsea tractors coming into the capital.
And the proverbial cherry on the cake: a draft plan to get London’s businesses recycling 70 percent of its waste by 2020.
This strategy sets out measures so that London’s businesses can take responsibility for the waste they produce and take action to use resources productively and, with London’s waste industry, maximise the social, environmental and economic opportunities of reprocessing and managing waste within London.
The Mayor’s vision for how London manages its business waste in 2020 is that:
– there is a high level of recycling and composting, more waste is reused and less waste is produced
– advanced waste technologies are used for treating non-recyclable waste, particularly technologies that produce energy
– London’s waste is primarily managed in London, reducing the impact on surrounding regions
– high quality advice, support and recycling services are offered to all businesses consistently across London
– the contribution of London’s waste to climate change is minimised.
The concepts of sustainability and study don’t offer go together, except in sentences such as “‘this level of drinking/debt is not sustainable,’ said a hungover/poor student.” Still, according to an article Greenbang read earlier, universities are starting to put sustainability courses on their curricula. Good show.
Fortune 500 companies looking to save energy, homeowners hoping to curb their carbon footprints and presidential candidates on both sides of the political spectrum all have started preaching and practicing sustainability.
Unity College is on top of that trend. Beginning in the fall, the school will begin offering two four-year degrees in sustainability. Students graduating with a bachelor of science degree in either of the new programs — Sustainable Design and Technology or Agriculture, Food and Sustainability — will be uniquely trained to satisfy government and industry needs at every level, college president Mitchell Thomashow says.
This set Greenbang thinking - how many other Universities are training the sustainable development workers of tomorrow? A quick Google search reveals a number across several continents. Double good show.
Greenbang likes this story a lot. She would even go so far as to say “Moi, j’aime cet article”, mainly because she wants to show off her French GCSE. The story that prompts this educational grandstanding comes courtesty of The Observer: French winemakers are turning to water transport rather than road to cut the emissions associated with shipping their products. And good on them for that, Greenbang says.
