Category Archives: Sustainability

Greenwashing: A Brief Introduction

Since I like to talk about Green a lot (and will have some posts in the near future about Green IT and how it can save you money while saving the planet), I thought I should write a post about greenwashing. Greenwashing is a practice used by a company to mislead consumers about the environmental benefits of a product or service. A common example of greenwashing is when a company tells you a product is “certified organic” even when there is no verifiable certification. However, this is not the only common example of greenwashing (or the green sheen) that you are likely to encounter. As noted in Wikipedia, a recent study by TerraChoice called “The Six Sins of Greenwashing” surveyed 1,018 randomly selected common consumer products found that 99% of them were guilty of greenwashing. As a result, they formulated the six sins of greenwashing which were:

Sin of the Hidden Trade-Off
Many “Energy-Efficient” electronics contain hazardous materials (which would likely be banned in the EU under RoHS, WEE, and / or REACH)
Sin of No Proof
Many products, like shampoos, claim to be “certified organic” but the company does not have any verifiable (third party) certifications.
Sin of Vagueness
Products are advertised as 100% natural even though many naturally occurring substances (like arsenic, formaldehyde, and cyanide)
Sin of Irrelevance
For example, claiming products are CFC-free, even though CFCs were banned 20 years ago.
Sin of Fibbing
Claiming your product is certified by an internationally recognized environmental standard like EcoLogo, Energy Star, and Green Seal.
Sin of Lesser of Two Evils
For example, “organic cigarettes” or “environmentally friendly” pesticides. WTF?!?

So how can you identify greenwashing? A page over on Green Home Beta has some tips you can use to find the real green amongst the wannabes. They included:

First, remember that not everything that claims to be green or sustainable actually is.
Consult Greenpeace’s Greenwash Detection Kit
Keep your eyes on CorpWatch’s Greenwash Awards.
Check out the University of Oregon’s Greenwashing index.
Check the Unsuitablog which is updated regularly with greenwashing examples and which also contains a post on How to Spot Greenwash.
Finally, be suspicious of all environmental campaigns. If a company is going overboard trying to sell its green credentials, ask yourself why? What are they trying to hide? Use your instincts. If it doesn’t feel right, then it probably isn’t.

Ten Green Ideas That Work, Part II

The April 28 (2008) issue of MacLean’s had a great environmental article on “Ten Ideas That Work” that consisted of ten mini-articles that is definitely worth a read. Today we are going to cover the last five. They were:

Windmills Under the Sea
Tidal Turbine Mania
This summer, Northern Ireland will be the first country to deploy massive underwater turbines to generate electricity. Developed by Vancouver-based Clean Current Power Systems, this initial system will power 1,000 homes. A second project is being undertaken in Nova Scotia, Canada in the Bay of Fundy and will be operational next year. It will be the largest commercial-scale unit in the world.
While the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow fast enough to power a windmill, tides are always on the move. This technology has enormous potential. For example, Clean Current estimates that the tides between Vancouver Island and the mainland is sufficient to power 500,000 homes annually! Worldwide, tidal power has the potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by at least 120 M tons annually, and this is likely a low estimate. This technology should be seriously considered by any costal, or island, state or country. While it doesn’t solve the energy problem as a whole, in some parts of the world, it can make quite a dent!
Orbit City Abu Dhabi
Eco-Friendly Cities
Last month, cranes began to dig the foundations for one of the world’s first eco-cities, which is to be situated 20 miles to the southeast of Abu Dhabi. Being built with money from the Emirati government, Masdar will be a carbon-neutral, zero-waste city of 50,000 that will encompass a university specializing in energy and sustainability issues and economic zones devoted to green industry and research. The entire city will be powered by photovoltaic cells, wind power, and biogas. Water will be conserved with vacuum toilets and high-tech treatment plants that will convert sewage into household water. And cars will be banned, as residents will be whisked about in Jetson-like driverless pods. Shaded walkways and narrow streets will be everywhere to provide cover from the hot sun.
One Sheet to the Wind
Wind Dams
Lake Lagoda, the largest lake in Europe, might soon be home to a massive wind-dam if an innovative British design firm (by the name of Chetwood Associates) has it’s way. The lake has a number of rocky gorges that act as wind funnels, and it is expected that a single 25m x 75m Kevlar sail will capture enough wind energy to produce 120 megawatts of electricity per year, enough to power 35 houses. It’s not a lot of power, but it’s cheap power, and sails can be hoisted wherever windy conditions prevail. The advantage is that, unlike conventional propellor wind-farms, it doesn’t let any wind-power escape.
The Power of Garbage
Plasma Conversion Power Plants that run on Garbage
Plasco recently threw the switch on a new energy conversion plant outside of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada on a new demonstration power-generating garbage plant that is believed to be the first functioning power plant in the world that runs on zero-emissions plasma conversion. Unsorted household garbage can be fed into a chamber that contains superheated plasma gas (in excess of 8000 C). The chamber breaks garbage down into its atomic components and cools it to produce a synthetic gas that is capable of being burned in a low-emission internal combustion engines. Furthermore, most of the by-products are usable. Every ton of household waste produces 150 kg of a clean, glass-like material that can be used by construction, potable water, small amounts of sulphur (a component of fertilizer) and salt, and a little over 1 kg of non-reusable waste that has to be landfilled. In other words, landfill requirements are reduced 900%!
Zero Carbon Footprints in the Sand
Carbon Neutral Resorts
Costa-Rica is aiming to be carbon-neutral by 2021 in an attempt to be the number one vacation spot for the carbon-couting grippie (green hippy) who wants a guilt-free vacation. Already, more than 80% of its energy comes from renewable sources such as wind and water. It’s airline, that uses transitional fuel technology, buys offsets every time it flies, and it’s public transportation system is extensive. It also has a significant re-forestation initiative, which will eat the small amount of carbon it intends to produce in the future.

Ten Green Ideas That Work, Part I

A Better Way To Catch Some Sun
Solar Power Farms
In Nevada, a 140-hectare concentrated solar power plant went on-line in June of 2007 and is currently producing up to 134 Million kWh of electricity per year. While this is only enough electricity to power about 14,000 homes, it’s renewable and with current oil costs, concentrated solar power, which concentrates the sun’s rays on a single point (that generates temperatures up to 1,500 C) to heat a fluid that drives turbines, is not much more expensive than alternatives. (It’s not even a factor of 2 anymore!) And with oil prices rising, and solar power technology falling, by the day, I expect it will be break even for countries with the right climate within a year! (Deserts or semi-deserts with lots of sun is perfect – which describes just about every country at or near the equator!)
Turning Up The Heat in Japan
Turn Down the AC
In May 2005, the Japanese government changed the future of summer fashion by introducing Cool Biz, an initiative to lower carbon emissions from air conditioning that resulted in thermostats in all government offices being raised to 28 C (82.4 F) from June to September, with private companies urged to follow suit. Today, it’s the new normal for offices (with over 48% of companies complying) that have also taken up the new floral Okinawan shirt (which is the Japanese equivalent of the Hawaiian shirt) dress code.
I think North America should follow suit, and keep thermostats at 25 C (77 F) in the warm summer months, and more importantly, keep thermostats at 17 C (62.6 F) in the cold winter months. Let’s face it – these temperatures are less than 20% off from what most of us consider room temperature, and if it’s 30 C (86 F), 35 C (95 F), or even 40 C (104 F) outside, 25 C (77 F) is refreshing. And in the winter, when it’s 0 C (32 F), -10 C (14 F), or below -20 C (-4 F), with a suit jacket or a sweater, 17 C (62.6 F) is balmy!
FreeWheeling in Paris
Bicycle Rentals
Last July, Paris launched a bicycle rental system and made 20,600 silver bikes in computerized stands available for rent by anyone. This is an idea that should be adopted by all small cities, urban-centers, and sub-urbs that are bike-friendly. But to make sure it takes off, I’d up the ante. I’d allow unlimited rentals for a small price per year (enough to cover the maintenance of the system and bike replacement). This would allow the program to quickly acquire, and maintain, enough bikes for everyone willing to use the system, and allow costs to be kept low. It would also deter thefts, because if anyone had unlimited use of a bike for a low price per year, who would buy one (and, hence, who would thievea sell to)?
Electric Cars on the Monthly Plan
An Electric Car Network
Shai Agassi’s Project Better Place recently signed a 42.3M project with Danish Energy Firm DONG to establish a network of electric cars in Denmark by 2011 in partnership with Renault-Nissan. The project is going to build 20,000 recharging stations nationwide and subsidize the cost of the cars by selling the service (recharging and replacing batteries) on a subscription plan. Each battery will be good for about 150 kms (93 miles), and when they run out, they can be swapped for recharged batteries at recharging stations. The goal is 100,000 electric cars on the road by 2010.
This is another project that should be adopted world-wide, but the cars should be redesigned to hold 2 batteries (since much of North America lives in suburbia and 16-32 km (10-20 mile) drives to work and back are not uncommon), and get at least 320 kms (200 miles) per charge.
A Tax on Flatulence
A Methane Tax on Farm Animals
The problem with agricultural animals such as cows, sheep, and goats is that they (constantly) burp and fart methane, a gas that traps 21 times more heat than carbon dioxide. This adds up fast — the world’s meat industry is responsible for roughly 18% of total greenhouse gas emissions, which is more than the total greenhouse gasses produced by transportation world-wide. In other-words, despite all the complaining by the grippies (green hippies), your SUV is not the problem (especially if it is less than five years old and has a kick-ass catalytic converter that insures that the air coming out is actually cleaner than the air going in if you live in cities like Los Angeles or Beijing). It’s your addiction to meat and the fact that North American’s eat more than twice as much meat as the global average! (Now, I’m not suggesting that you should be a vegetarian, as I’m not, but I am suggesting that you could eat less meat. Once a day is plenty. We have lots of protein alternatives, and many experts agree that you shouldn’t eat red meat more than three to four times a week.)
In an effort to deal with this problem, New Zealand introduced a “fart tax” on flatulent animals. It was eventually dropped after heavy lobbying, but I think it’s a great idea – as long as the price increases that will result are countered with price decreases (in the form of import tax reductions, production tax reductions, or just plain old subsidies) on alternative sources of protein. If we’re going to eat more than our fair share of meat, we should pay for the privilege, but the average working person, who is feeling the pinch of continually rising food prices, should not still be able to afford a healthy diet and, thus, alternative, greener sources of protein should be very affordable.
In addition, the animals’ diets should be altered to keep methane production to a minimum and nitrification inhibitors (which prevents nitrogen from leaking from the soil and forming the greenhouse gas known as nitrous oxide) should be used, and New Zealand’s lead in tackling this problem in this manner should also be investigated.

In our next post, we’ll review the last five.

Understanding Your Carbon Footprint

I know this post is going to draw the heretics out of the woodwork, but after Jim Tompkins, one of the best presenters at this year’s 41st Annual Supply Chain & Logistics Canada Conference on Creating a Resilient Supply Chain was Ron Dembro’s (CEO of Zerofootprint) presentation on Measuring corporate footprint, offsetting, and what you can do to combat climate change.

Although I agree that offsetting should be a last resort, and question just how effective some of the initiatives out there are (and what percentage of the donation actually goes to renewable energy projects versus administrative expenses and executives’ pockets), I see how it could be an effective tool to get industry to control their emissions. Plus, I was impressed with the fact that the speaker admitted that offsetting should be the last resort – not the first.

The presentation also had some good statistics and points-of-fact that highlighted the fact that Gore’s “inconvenient truth” is really an “inconvenient half-truth” and that although we should be willing to take responsibility for our actions, as individuals, there’s only so much we can do to offset the carbon and Greenhouse Gasses being pumped into the atmosphere as a result of our material world focus. When 40% of total GHG emissions are a result of energy consumption to heat, light, and cool buildings (and the water they consume), and the vast majority of that is for commercial buildings (and poorly designed warehouses in particular), when two coal-burning factories in china pump out more emissions into the atmosphere than could be saved if every house in North America switched to fluorescent bulbs, and when private transportation (i.e. our vehicles) account for less than 3% of emissions, how much do you think we’re really going to accomplish by “flicking off”? (That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do our part, because responsibility in the home will lead to responsibility in the work place – and 1/3 of gas consumption in vehicles is due to idling, but it does mean that the whacko environmentalists should either educate themselves and get their facts straight or go home.)

What we need to do is design our buildings, our manufacturing plants, and our energy producing factories more efficiently. According to a recent study, 48% of total energy consumption and associated GHG emissions can be eliminated just through better design – which is even more positive than the McKinsey findings I recently quoted. And I have to agree. Think of your average bare-bones box-design metal warehouse and the amount of energy that goes into heating it in the winter or cooling it in the summer because the hot, or cold, air leaks out of it almost as fast as it’s pumped in. Then think about the number of poorly insulated and designed office buildings on the grid (with an entire wall of windows facing the east and air conditioning on 24/7 even though they’re mostly empty at least 12/7) that consume oodles of energy from a grid that burns coal when it could be capturing sun, wind, or wave power instead. All of a sudden oil, gas, and even coal (as long as the plants have appropriate filters and the coal is clean) becomes a lot less of a problem because we need less of it, get more bang for every gallon of it, and the resulting carbon emissions and GHGs would be at 1985-1990 levels, which we know the planet can handle reasonably well (as it did then), as long as we don’t keep cutting down forests on a massive scale without replanting (as many countries are still apt to do).

He was also kind enough to point out that even though Canada is the 4th largest offender in emissions (after Australia, the US, and the United Arab Emirates), that we can’t do anything about 25% of our emissions – because they are as a result of the tar pits, a natural phenomenon (and, as a result, if we want to be more environmentally conscious, we really have our work cut out for us). However, that doesn’t excuse us because we do lead in waste per capita (with the US #2 and Australia #3 – but not for long, as they are introducing innovative waste processing), and there’s no excuse for that. (I hope the rest of the country takes BC’s lead and introduces carbon taxes. I know it sounds like it’s not going to do much if its accompanied by tax breaks in other tax categories, but once industry sees how much it is paying in carbon tax, it will see the tax saving opportunities associated with reducing carbon, and will actively work towards reducing energy consumption – as that will deliver a significant return both in terms of lower energy costs AND reduced taxes.)

An Introduction to Carbon Footprinting

This is a topic I’ve been meaning to write about for a while, but due to the depth required even in an introductory piece, and, thus, the time it would take to construct a post I’d be happy with, I’ve been putting it off until I had the time. I still don’t have the time, but Industry Week just published “The ‘What, Why, How and When’ of Carbon Footprinting”, which is a really good introduction to the topic. It’s five pages, but worth the read. I’ll highlight some of the key points below, and add a few of my own.

The article starts off by noting that H.R. 2764, signed into law by President Bush in December of 2007, contains a section that states that of the funds provided in the Environmental Programs and Management account, not less than $3,500,000 shall be provided for activities to develop and publish a draft rule not later than nine months after the date of enactment of this Act, and a final rule not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, to require mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas emissions above appropriate thresholds in all sectors of the economy of the United States’.

This is a lot more innocuous than it may sound. This says that, by September of this year, reporting guidelines on draft emission standards will be drafted and, more importantly, by July of 2009, GHG emission reporting will be mandatory in the US – just like it is in Australia under the “National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act” of 2007. (And if you’re reading this down under and need help preparing the reports, there’s a new offering by Tradeslot Pty Ltd called Carbon Navigator that might be able to help.)

Chances are those guidelines will be similar to the mandatory reporting regulation that California is expected to introduce any day now, which is expected to be largely based on the GHG protocol Standards developed through a joint effort of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the World Resources Institute (WRI), which is becoming the defacto Global Standard.

However, the introduction of legislation is not a bad thing. Collection of this data will help consumer and manufacturer alike! Consumers will have the power to differentiate between green claims and green reality, and the companies that are green in practice, and not just in advertising, will gain favor in the hearts and minds of environmentally conscious consumers. Furthermore, forward-thinking managers will be able to use the resulting data to reduce costs, drive efficiencies, and even open up new sales opportunities. Without the data collection effort that is required to properly tabulate and report emissions, Wal-Mart would have never figured out that the refrigerants used in its grocery sections contributed a greater percentage of its greenhouse gas footprint than its truck fleet!

So what is a carbon footprint? It’s a greenhouse gas emissions inventory that includes all of the greenhouse gases (methane, nitrous oxide, and HFCs) in addition to carbon dioxide that is generated by a company in its day to day activities.

How is it measured? The GHG Protocol specifies standard calculation methods and provides worksheets that a company can use to calculate its carbon footprint in a manner that can be compared in an apples-to-apples fashion with other companies. It has three scopes:

emissions from sources owned by the company
emissions from electricity purchased from the grid
emissions created by suppliers in the company’s value chain

The first time you do it, it will be a major undertaking. Eaton Corp. started doing ISO 14000 (environmental management) back in 2000, but wasn’t able to aggregate verifiable data until 2006. However, the article contains some advice from John Hoekstra of Summit Energy in implementing a program to document and report carbon footprints. It goes as follows:

Know the Goal and the Road Ahead
A formal plan lets you focus on the key data requirements.
Set a Realistic Baseline
Understand your operations and determine if it is possible to compile a historical emissions inventory that meets data materiality thresholds.
Define the Boundaries
Bite off what you can cost-effectively chew.
Map out all of your Sources
Identify each facility, asset, and potential emissions source.
Make appropriate assumptions.
Identify ways to calculate emissions that ensure completeness, but balance level of detail. Where possible, use the GHG Protocol as a guide.
Centralize Data Management
Data is the key.
Be flexible
The regulatory requirements are going to be in a state of formation and flux globally for some time. Be sure you can modify and enhance reporting processes and systems as required.and to this I’d add
Be patient
You’re not going to accomplish all of your goals overnight.
Start Now!
As per rule 8 above, it’s going to take some time – so get a jump start on it and you’ll be a leg up over the competition and that much closer to identifying cost savings opportunities that are environmentally friendly.

Until you’ve collected the data, you won’t know where your biggest offenses lie and where your biggest opportunities are. Consider the example of a life-cycle analysis on a 12-pack of glass bottled beer that found that 68% of the carbon footprint was due to supplied materials, and that glass bottles accounted for an astonishing 56% of the carbon footprint.

The life-cycle analysis that will be required as part of the carbon footprinting will pay off! Consider the recently published article “Life-cycle Analysis Pays Off” in the same publication that documented Caterpillar’s Life-cycle analysis project where they found that the remanufacture of a cylinder head reduced GHG emissions by 50%, energy usage by 80%, water usage by 90%, and material usage by 99%, when compared to the manufacturer of a new one.

Sourcing Innovation

Next Generation Supply Management Defined