P3 Communicating People, Profits & Planet

Happy Dia de la Tierra

Some interesting observations from our friends at FH Hispania today. Happy Earth Day to all.

Wind energy has arrived...

When a Republican, Texan, cowboy oilman decides to invest hundreds of millions of dollars to tell America about the future of American wind energy, it's worth listening. And, lest anyone think that wind energy is still the purview of off-the-grid types and energy dreamers, google The Pickens Plan (and read up about wind energy in any business magazine any week of the year, practically.)

T. Boone Pickens, who made his many fortunes in the oil business, is so confident that America is, as he puts it, "the Saudi Arabia of wind energy," that he is investing a portion of his riches in two ambitious projects: 1) he's planning the world's largest wind farm in -- where else -- Texas; and 2) he is launching the Pickens Plan. Simply put, the Pickens Plan is a national public awareness campaign designed to teach the average American about the enormous wind energy potential waiting to be harvested in the United States. Clean energy, independent energy, a new manufacturing boom, green collar jobs -- throw whatever set of optimistic labels you want at it, the American wind energy boom will take the compliment. Why is T. Boone investing (or gambling, if you're a skeptic) in the American public to pay attention? Because nothing makes the inside-the-beltway club pay attention to the need for production tax credits, investment tax credits, and the need for a national energy policy faster than public outcry.

So, whether you're a wind believer, a wind denier, or still figuring out which way it's all blowing, it's worth checking out what a new true believer, with a strong energy resume, is saying.

ICT to cut CO2 emissions

You might remember a previous blog I wrote about the Commission Communication on the promotion of the use of ICT (Information and Communication Technology) to improve energy efficiency of the economy which announced a range of measures to increase the use of ICT to fight climate change and reduce energy waste.
A study commissioned by the Global e-sustainability initiative (Gesi) and British NGO the Climate Group (delivered on 19 June) will probably provide some ammunitions to the European Commission. The study is called "The Smart 2020" and describes the ICTs' potential for reducing global emissions.
What I have found interesting out of the report is that unless measures are taken, the industry's impact on the climate is forecast to grow rather than diminish. "To help, rather than hinder, the fight against climate change, the ICT sector must manage its own growing impact and continue to reduce emissions from data centres, telecommunications networks and the manufacture and use of its products"
It also says little is to be expected from virtual technologies such as teleworking, video-conferencing and e-commerce, which it was believed could help reduce the need for freight or to travel. The report notes that the "dematerialisation" of the economy "is only one part (6%) of the estimated low carbon benefits the ICT sector can deliver".  So, the areas where ICT can contribute more (similarly to the one listed by the Commission) are :

- Industry motors and industrial automation (0.97 GtCO2e in 2020, worth €68 billion);
- Logistics (1.52 GtCO2e, with energy savings worth €208 billion);
- Buildings (1.68 GtCO2e, worth €216 billion), and;
- Grid technologies (2.03 GtCO2e, worth €79 billion).

Busted Bottles

Yay!  The blight of so many school lunch rooms will soon be eliminated!  Several Canadian district school boards are moving to ban the sale of bottled water from school vending machines and cafeterias.

 
Bottled water is one of those things that really gets my goat.  The popularity of bottled water here is undeniable - Statistics Canada says nearly one-third of all Canadian households are choosing bottled water over tap water and the data indicates those numbers are on the rise.

 

It’s not surprising with water quality tragedies that have occurred in our recent past (2000) in Walkerton, Ontario where seven people died and more than 2,300 were made ill due to water contaminated by e.coli and campylobacter bacteria, some people are not ready to trust the government to ensure a safe water supply.

Why then do we still buy it and drink the stuff?  Convenience is my guess – and my excuse when I end up doing so.

I hope more school boards and institutions take the lead that Waterloo District School Board has (and Toronto and Ottawa-Carleton School Districts are considering) and eliminate this scourge on the sustainability landscape.

 

What do you think?  Are you a dedicated bottled water drinker or a tap-water snob?

But here in Toronto, we boast some of the cleanest water on the planet.  I trust that this municipal water – treated through a rigorous system in one of four treatment plants is as good as it gets, and likely much better than anything that comes out of a bottle that has come from (in some cases) another foreign municipality’s water supply.

Bottled water sale and production is totally unsustainable – besides that, it’s not necessary in most places in North America where hygiene and sanitation standards are consistently high and checked with continuous rigour. This, coupled with the fact that most bottles end up in landfill, results in a complete and utter exercise in futility.

Photo credit: Flickr Chhata, 16th Oct 2007

Is climate change a zero-sum game?

Environmental Leader featured a story this week about how, overall, global greenhouse gas emissions increased more than three percent last year. China contributed two-thirds of that increase, boasting an eight-percent increase nationally in 2007 over 2006. What's more, according to the report's authors at the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, China has surpassed the United States in GHG emissions, churning out 25 percent of all emissions worldwide, compared with the U.S.' 21 percent.

Clearly, this little blog post can't tackle the mammoth topic of China's economic development nor its role and position in the international political-economic order. But it can ask a simple question: Does China's trajectory negate all the efforts underway? And more important in the long run, will China's path of increased emissions dissuade nations, NGO's and companies from reaching for newer and cleaner technologies and fuels, if all their efforts are balanced out by China's growing hunger for cheap energy?

All this China handwringing doesn't exempt the United States from its own responsibilities--the report referenced here also identifies the United States as the world leader in emissions per capita, ahead of the E.U, Russia, China and India. And there are some steps we in the U.S. can take: 1) Walk the talk -- we can only demand performance once we've established ourselves as real leaders in climate change solutions; and, 2) Win back friends -- we can't stage an intervention alone, we need old friends by our side and new friends to join the club.

But maybe the bigger issue is, is this study fair? Should total emissions matter more than per capita emissions? Do China's 1.2 billion residents need to be held to a higher standard than the 300 million Americans who have enjoyed as much energy and product consumption as they could afford for decades? Maybe the issue isn't about zero-sum, but about equitable standards. What do you think?

The Phantoms Among Us

It’s the steady drip, drip, drip of power consumption.  I think we’ve all seen the unblinking red, orange, green and blue LEDs that stare back from the supposedly switched off devices throughout our homes.  Sometimes they serve a great purpose to guide us from collision in the dark, but with every consumer electronic device glow, there’s a steady stream of power being used with little or no purpose. 

Add that to the power consumed by devices while in use, and it’s no wonder that demand for electricity continues to grow.  Did you know that a 42” plasma can consume more power than a full sized refrigerator?  Data shows that 46.1 million LCD TVs shipped worldwide in Q1.  How about the energy consumed by the 1.1 billion chargers worldwide that accompanied the new cell phones shipped last year?

There may be a bit of hope on the horizon. Among the myriad of approaches being engineered and coming on the market, the development of next-gen power factor correction (PFC) devices may help reduce the overall demand for new power plant construction as well as the greenhouse gases associated with putting another generation facility in operation.  PFC circuits can reside in power supplies of almost any electronic device – computer, HDTV, DVD player or even the lowly wall charger for cell phones and laptops – and can reduce overall energy drawn by each device.  Think of it as the difference between drinking from a fire hose and a water glass – using this new approach, devices ask for much less power from the wall socket and don’t waste excess energy.

[Full disclosure – I worked with a semiconductor firm last year with PFC news outreach to OEMs.]

In the meantime, there are basic strategies to adopt to get a handle on your overall energy consumption:

• Do an energy audit of your house, provided by your local utility at little or no cost
• Use an energy consumption meter to determine which devices in your home really are drawing the most energy
• When replacing appliances and electronics, take a look at Energy Star-compliant devices as well as exploring those that employ Power Factor Correction in their power supplies
• Unplug those wall chargers and switch off power strips when devices aren’t needed

Sure, it might mean a few less night lights for guidance in the dark, but learning to save starts with a series of incremental steps.

Guest Post: Look for Food Labeled "Sustainable" Instead of "Organic"

Our colleague Linda Smith, a senior leader for FH Canada, recently sent us a guest post on “the future of food.”  FH last week co-hosted a breakfast briefing entitled “What’s In Store” featuring noted food and nutrition experts including FH’s own Eye on FDA blogger Mark Senak and many others.

With so much interest in the intersection of sustainability and agriculture, we wanted to share Linda’s thoughts with you. Here is Linda's guest post:

Organic has been on the rise for the last decade in North American agriculture with grocery stores now devoting large produce sections to pricier organic produce. But as food inflation hits us rapidly and we struggle to feed the world now and in the future, we will see some dramatic emphasis shifts in food. We will look for food labeled “sustainable” to denote food that is highly productive and better for the environment.

Today, with demand outstripping supply, food prices soaring and food protests and riots happening in countries from Thailand to Italy, another wave in agricultural productivity is urgently needed. We will start thinking not only about feeding ourselves and our families, but truly become concerned about feeding the world.

And with the emphasis on increased crop productivity we will see the rise of GMO’s, genetically-modified foods which will be engineered for harsher climates, to be more insect resilient and to create even larger yields. While we once ran from GMO’s we will embrace them those that have direct benefits to increased productivity and yield. GMO’s to resist salinity will be possible so we can use sea water for irrigation as will plants that can further resist drought. We will need a new armamentarium of agricultural weapons.

Advanced sustainable agriculture will draw heavily on agro ecology and adopt some of the methods of organic farming to solve problems like soil erosion and the rising costs of fertilizers. New tools for superefficient “precision agriculture” will allow water and other inputs like drip irrigation systems with soil moisture sensors, so we don’t waste a drop.

Not only will every household have a backyard vegetable garden, high rises will be devoted to growing food to reduce the foot print on the land. And to reduce energy costs, every farm will have a wind turbine.

The world is changing but the world of agriculture will change the most rapidly.

EU waking up on the value of ICT in the fight against climate change

On 13 May the European Commission adopted a Communication on the promotion of the use of ICT  (Information and Communication Technology)  to improve energy efficiency of the economy.

This text is part of the EU overall efforts to combat climate change : as you might know, our target is a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to 1990 levels and 20% renewable energy use by 2020.

Bottom line on the Communication (soft law in Europe) is that the Commission believes that the ICT sector will not only contribute to improving energy efficiency and combating climate change by reducing its own carbon emissions (estimated as a 2% of the global CO2 emissions) but  it will also stimulate the development  of  energy-efficiency technologies that will foster the competitiveness of European industry and create new business opportunities.  ICTs is therefore seen as  an enabler to improve energy efficiency across the economy. As a matter of fact,  all sectors of the economy are increasingly ICT-dependent. The initial focus will be on the power grid, on energy-smart homes and buildings and on smart lighting.

Having said that, I think that there are 3 main reasons why this communication can be of interest to companies:

-          the Commission is encouraging the ICT industry overall to demonstrate leadership in reducing its own CO2 emissions. This open call for “help” could be very important especially from a reputational perspective. ICT companies are encouraged to demonstrate commitment, leadership and far-reaching thinking to promote energy efficiency. To this end, the Communication mentions British Telecom as example of good practice  because of its achievements in setting and reaching ambitious emissions targets.

-          the Communication has been delivered by the Directorate General Information Society (not DG Environment). DG Infosoc has been very quiet until now on the debate of energy efficiency and Commissioner Reding has picked up the value of the contribution of the ICT sector later than his counterparts in the Commission.

-          a platform will be established in the coming months and a variety of representations will be welcomed to join.

Sustaina-what?

According to a recent Brandweek story, only one in three consumers in the U.S. and U.K. is “familiar” or “very familiar” with the term sustainability and its meaning.

Are you surprised?

I’m not, actually. While we all talk about it, I’m not convinced that the "average" consumer is as engaged in the terminology as professional communicators, marketers and businesspeople are.

I don’t think that means sustainability communications is a fading concern. Just the opposite, actually. If these results are to be believed (and they seem to echo those from other surveys), then consumers need more education not less. There’s a great deal of interest in the general topic, but not a lot of understanding. The confluence of those two streams presents a river of opportunity for communicators. 

To me, the questions now are: how do you reach consumers with a compelling, credible message? Who will lead the way in conducting this kind of legitimate communications effort? When will we see a change in consumer awareness?

The story also addresses the survey’s focus on consumer perceptions about environmental issues and the motivations behind such perceptions. It’s an interesting read.

Check out the story for yourself and let us know what you think.

A Taxing Road for Biodiesel Drivers

Ah, the joy of living the green life.  You compost, sort your recyclables and have switched to compact fluorescent bulbs.  Perhaps you’ve moved to a hybrid car, or maybe you’ve gone one step further and are looking for a biodiesel ride.  If so, get ready for a possibly bumpy road as state agencies begin to sit up and take notice of the tens of thousands of vehicles that may (or may not) be paying their fair share. 

According to a recent Los Angeles Times article, California drivers are surprised to learn that they can’t just get in their biodiesel beauty, roll into the nearest fast food joint and drive off into the sunset.  Even green Governator Arnold Schwarzenegger was caught by surprise when his oil-propelled Hummer (powered by cooking oil from Costco), was notified that road tax was due.  Hold onto your hats -- there might be an extra governmental item or two you might need:

• A diesel fuel supplier’s license
• Quarterly reporting of grease usage, for a gallon-based road tax levy
• A license from the Meat and Poultry Board to haul away used grease
• A million dollar liability insurance in case you spill the above grease, and,
• Clearance from the Air Quality Resources Board that your biodiesel machine meets pollution guidelines

Several states, including Illinois, North Carolina, Texas, Rhode Island and Indiana have put exemptions in place to allow biodiesel drivers to avoid paying road tax, so the landscape at the state level is starting to change.

So what do you think? Should states move to provide alternative fuel vehicles and their early adopters with a clearer path to getting their cars on the road?  Does the value of a green vehicle outweigh the income realized from road taxes?  With a gallon of unleaded regular gas at $4.05 and rising, and home-brewed biofuel clocking in at 21 cents a gallon and up, the price difference could make some drivers take a second look.