(BPT) – Recycling is one of the easiest and least expensive ways to help the environment. Although many people understand the significance of recycling, there is still room to improve participation and recycling rates. The Carton Council, which works to increase the recycling of food and beverage cartons, has several tips to help consumers become more diligent recyclers.
1. Make a game plan: Develop a strategy for hassle-free recycling by keeping containers within easy reach in areas where recyclable packages are consumed. Know your community’s collection schedule and have enough space to store your recyclables until the designated collection day.
2. Know what to recycle and what to throw: Keep in mind that acceptable materials vary based on the recycling program and community. Turn to your community’s website to determine what can and can’t be recycled where you live.
3. Stick it to your memory: To help stick to your recycling plan, create reminders throughout your home. Try placing notes in visible locations, such as on your refrigerator or where you place your keys, to keep recycling top of mind. Make sure to note your collection day.
4. Make a difference by being a recycling influencer: Be the change you wish to see by inspiring others to recycle. Share your recycling efforts on social media and tag your local recycling program, homeowner’s association, and even the Carton Council to inspire others to join the recycling movement.
5. Don’t judge a book by its cover: Dirty, misshapen or dented packages can still be recycled. Unless the item is covered in food, such as peanut butter or melted cheese, place it in your recycling container.
6. Own your role in the power of recycling: Take pride in your efforts and recognize the positive impact your recycling makes. Without recycling, there would be no recycled materials available to create new products. For example, 30 food and beverage cartons can be recycled to produce a sustainable ceiling tile. A ton of paper made from recycled fiber conserves 7,000 gallons of water and 17-31 trees.
Recycling is an easy way everyone can play a role in helping the environment.
Not sure if food and beverage cartons can be recycled where you live? Check our address locator at RecycleCartons.com.
Conducting worst-case crisis scenario exercises can help ensure companies are as prepared as possible when, not if, disaster strikes. Indeed, too many business leaders have found out the hard way that today’s ‘it would never happen here” crisis can become a real-life corporate emergency tomorrow. Image: GETTY
By Edward Segal, Senior Contributor at Forbes • Reposted: July 20, 2023
Conducting worst-case crisis scenario exercises can help ensure companies are as prepared as possible when, not if, disaster strikes.
Indeed, too many business leaders have found out the hard way that today’s ‘it would never happen here” crisis can become a real-life corporate emergency tomorrow.
Given the nature of all the crises that could befall organizations, there is an element of urgency for practicing responses to “what-if” situations and ensuring there are plans place to deal with different disasters, scandals, or other emergencies.
Reality Checks
The crisis simulations can provide company executives with reality checks about their readiness, resources, and responses to situations that could impact their organization’s image, reputation, operations, and bottom line.
“Scenarios can be used to raise awareness, to train and reinforce skills and procedures, to assess preparedness and identify gaps, as an aid in developing crisis/emergency response plans, and even to test and improvise such plans,” Eric Stern, a professor at the College of Emergency Preparedness, Homeland Security & Cybersecurity at the University of Albany, said via email.
There are many ways in which the simulations can be conducted, such as tabletop and thought exercises, computer simulations, and role playing off-site. But no matter how it’s done, the issue is whether they are tested at all.
‘Different Definitions’
“Each company will have a different definition of a worst-case scenario—if you’re an airline, it’s a crash or a massive passenger-related issue; if you’re a tech company, it could be a cybersecurity breach; if you’re a nonprofit, it could be insider fraud,” Heather Wilson, managing director and head of crisis and litigation at TrailRunner International, said via email.
The more varied the subject of the exercise, the better. The possibilities could include accidents, strikes, the death of corporate executives, and economic downturns.
The simulations “can be inspired by recent or historical experience of peer organizations at home or abroad, expert risk analysis of contingencies that have not happened yet but are thought likely in the future, as well as by data-driven so-called modeling and simulation techniques,” the University of Albany’s Stern observed.
‘Often Overlooked’
“Worst-case scenario planning is often overlooked but incredibly invaluable in crisis communications, Zoe Mumba, senior manager for public relations and communications at Bitmovin, a video streaming technology company, said via email.
“While it is unrealistic to have an individual and tailored plan for every worst-case scenario, there should be a plan in place for how your company should respond to a crisis in the first few hours,” she said. That should include “the process for communicating with internal and external stakeholders, the approval process for communications ,and even having a template for holding statements.
‘Building Muscle Memory’
“Exercising builds muscle memory. By practicing ways of working in a crisis, a team becomes comfortable working under pressure. They understand what needs to be done, when and how,” Jonathan Hemus, managing director and crisis management consultant at crisis management agency Insignia, said via email.
“This creates confidence and assurance, which is lacking in teams who fail to rehearse. It means the team can focus on the really important parts of managing the crisis—making big decisions—rather than worrying about the process itself,” he observed.
Not Just For Brick And Mortar Organizations
Crisis response exercises are important for every business and organization, including those who operate outside of traditional offices.
Each year the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo holds a public parade, “and we do a run-through from a crisis communications standpoint,” Danielle Grossman, the organization’s director of strategic communications, said via email.
“We work through our plan from start to finish if there was some type of crisis. We mimic who is contacted first, then the chain of command thereafter and how we ultimately disseminate information to the public, if any,” she noted.
If you don’t think it’s important to anticipate and practice for worst-case scenarios, think again.
By Eleftheria Kontou, Assistant Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign via The Conversation • Reposted: July 20, 2023
More than 3.6 million electric cars are driving around the U.S., but if you live in an apartment, finding an available charger isn’t always easy. Grocery stores and shopping centers might have a few, but charging takes time and the spaces may be taken or inconvenient.
Several states and cities, aiming to expand EV use, are now trying to lift that barrier to ownership with “right to charge” laws.
Illinois’ governor signed the latest right-to-charge law in June 2023, requiring that all parking spots at new homes and multiunit dwellings be wired so they’re ready for EV chargers to be installed. Colorado, Florida, New York and other states have passed similar laws in recent years.
But having wiring in place for charging is only the first step to expanding EV use. Apartment building managers, condo associations and residents are now trying to figure out how to make charging efficient, affordable and available to everyone who needs it when they need it.
Electric cars can benefit urban dwellers
As a civil engineer who focuses on transportation, I study ways to make the shift to electric vehicles equitable, and I believe that planning for multiunit dwelling charging and accessibility is smart policy for cities.
Transitioning away from fossil-fueled vehicles to electric vehicles has benefits for the environment and the health of urban residents. It reduces tailpipe emissions, which can cause respiratory problems and warm the climate; it mitigates noise; and it improves urban air quality and quality of life.
Yet almost a quarter of all U.S. housing structures have more than one dwelling unit, according to the 2019 American Housing Survey. In California, 32.5% of urban dwellings have multiple units, and only a third of those units include access to a personal garage where a charger could be installed.
Even if installing a personal charger is an option, it can be expensive in a multiunit dwelling if wiring isn’t already in place. And it often comes with other obstacles, including the potential need for electrical upgrades or challenges from homeowner association rules and restrictions. Installing chargers can involve numerous stakeholders who can impede the process – lot owners, tenants, homeowners associations, property managers, electric utilities and local governments.
Right-to-charge laws aims for ubiquitous home charging
Right-to-charge laws aim to streamline home charging access as new buildings go up.
Illinois’ new Electric Vehicle Charging Act requires that 100% of parking spaces at new homes and multiunit dwellings be ready for electric car charging, with a conduit and reserved capacity to easily install charging infrastructure. The new law also gives renters and condominium owners in new buildings a right to install chargers without unreasonable restriction from landlords and homeowner associations.
Public chargers typically aren’t as convenient as charging at home, and chargers aren’t always available. Photo: martin-dm/E+ via Getty Images
California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon and Virginia also have right-to-charge lawsdesigned to make residential community charging deployment easier, as do several U.S. cities including Seattle and Washington, D.C. Most apply only to owner-occupied buildings, but a few, including California’s and Colorado’s, also apply to rental buildings.
Chicago officials have considered an ordinance that wouldinclude existing buildings, too.
Sharing chargers can reduce the cost
There are several steps communities can take to increase access to chargers and reduce the cost to residents.
In a new study, colleagues and I looked at how to design shared charging for an apartment building with scheduling that works for everyone. By sharing chargers, residential communities can reduce the costs associated with charger installation and use.
The biggest challenge to shared charging is often scheduling. We found that a centralized charging management system that suggests charging times for each electric car owner that aligns with the owner’s travel schedule and the amount of charge needed can work – with enough chargers.
Apartments in a tower in China look down on an EV charging station covered in solar panels. Photo: Zhihao/Moment via Getty Images
In a typical multiunit dwelling in Chicago – with an average of 14 cars in the parking lot – a small community charging hub with two level 2 chargers, the type common in homes and office buildings, can cover daily residential recharging demand at a cost of about 15 cents per kilowatt-hour. But having only two chargers means residents are waiting on average 2.2 hours to charge.
A larger charging hub with eight level 2 chargers in the same city avoids the delay but increases the cost of charging to 21 cents per kWh because of upfront cost of purchasing and installing the chargers. To put that into context, the average electricity cost for Chicago residents is 16 cents per kWh.
The future of charging management at multiunit dwellings will be automated for efficiency, with a computer or artificial intelligence determining the most efficient schedule for charging. Optimized scheduling can be responsive to the times renewable electricity generation sources are producing the most power – midday for solar energy, for example – and to dynamic electricity pricing. Automation can also eliminate delays for drivers while saving money and reducing the burden on the electric grid.
The current limited access to home charging in many cities constrains electric vehicle adoption, slows down the decarbonization of U.S. transportation and exacerbates inequitiesin electric vehicle ownership. I believe efforts to expand charging in multidwelling buildings can help lift some of the biggest barriers and help reduce noise and pollution in urban cores at the same time.
CNH Industrial worked with Monarch Tractor to create the New Holland T4 Electric Power, an all-electric utility tractor with zero tailpipe emissions. Photo: CNH Industrial
By Tina Casey from Triple Pundit • Reposted: July 19, 2023
With their reliance on massive combines and other large pieces of diesel-powered equipment, the agriculture and construction industries present a major challenge for electrification. Nevertheless, suppliers are beginning to offer electric options, and the global firm CNH Industrial illustrates how careful strategizing can yield rapid results.
A head start on electrification
The Electrification Portfolio Management team is a relatively new addition to CNH Industrial as the electrification industry picked up steam over recent years. The sector’s rapid rise has enabled CNH Industrial to recruit talent from a deep pool of accomplished electrification experts.
“Now that the technology is known, there is a well-defined supply chain and expertise in the market, we decided to look at the market and bring in that expertise,” said Mario de Amicis, head of the CNH Industrial electrification team.
Knowing both the customer and the technology is another foundation of the company’s strategy. While some firms have gained publicity by electrifying massive pieces of machinery, CNH Industrial assessed the demand for relatively small, lightweight utility tractors, taking particular note of the specific benefits that electrification would bring to customers.
Collaborating to accelerate electrification
Another leg of the strategy involves forming partnerships with experienced electrification companies, helping to accelerate the timeline from concept to market. For its inaugural electric tractor project, CNH Industrial enlisted the U.S. firm Monarch Tractor as a strategic partner.
The result was a prototype version of the T4 Electric Power, an all-electric utility tractor for CNH Industrial’s New Holland Agriculture brand. The prototype was produced in record time and unveiled at the company’s tech day event in Phoenix, Arizona, in December 2022.
A production model will extend to CNH Industrial’s Case IH brand as well, where the company has also introduced an all-electric mini-excavator.
Electric vs. diesel vehicles: Compare and contrast
Around 70 percent of the CNH Industrial’s electrification team comes from the automotive industry, de Amicis said. That experience shows up in T4 features that have become standard fare in electric vehicles, including battery range that can last up to a day depending on the type of work. Another key element is fast-charging capability: a bi-directional charging system enables the tractor to provide power to electric tools (such as welding machines and drills) and function as a generator for emergency or daily use.
The commercial version of the T4 will launch with remote and autonomous features. Similar to those in other electric vehicles, these elements are expected to result in significant productivity improvements.
“Farmers can remotely activate the tractor via a smartphone app,” the company detailed in a recent announcement. “Shadow Follow Me mode lets operators sync machines to work together. A 360-degree perception system detects and avoids obstacles. Telematics and auto guidance keep all functions in check for operators.”
CNH Industrial also took care to incorporate a power take-off feature and other standard elements for attaching implements to a tractor, with a high-tech twist. The T4 comes with a fleet management controller that recognizes and links the attachments, enabling farmers to run the tractor remotely through all stages of use.
All the benefits of electrification
As with all electric vehicles, the T4 eliminates tailpipe emissions and offers a significant savings on operating costs. CNH Industrial estimates a savings up to 90 percent over the cost of fueling and maintaining a diesel engine. The electric drive also delivers improvements in responsiveness, traction control and all-around handling, according to the company.
In terms of agricultural use, the electric tractor eliminates the risk of soil contamination from spills or accidents, de Amicis said. That’s an especially important consideration for regenerative agriculture, which prioritizes soil health.
On a more holistic basis, regenerative practices also prioritize worker health, making a zero-emission tractor all the more attractive.
The T4 reduces noise by up to 90 percent, according to company estimates, and tamps down on vibrations, too. That’s a significant improvement in the well-being of both workers and farm animals, while lessening disturbance for nearby neighbors.
Similar benefits are at work in CNH Industrial’s electric mini-excavator. It is sized to enable it to pass through doorways and conduct work indoors, free of the diesel fumes and noise of conventional equipment.
Next steps for decarbonization
CNH Industrial also offers farmers a methane biofuel option for New Holland’s T7 and T6 tractors. These models are a particularly good fit for livestock farms with digester equipment, which extract biogas from manure.
“Farmers grow crops and use waste products to generate biomethane, which powers the tractor, which, in turn, helps to grow those very crops,” New Holland’s website reads.
Electrifying combines and larger pieces of equipment involves another set of challenges. Here, CNH Industrial is focusing on a hybrid strategy to satisfy customer demand for both performance and efficiency, while also achieving a sharp reduction in carbon emissions, de Amicis said.
“Battery-electric, with no combustion, is a really good application for small machines,” he explained. “But when we move up, we know that — due to the limit of the power density and cost of the battery — we need to talk about hybridization for medium to large machines.
Much of the equipment attached to farm and construction vehicles is driven by hydraulic systems, which lend themselves to electrification.
“Electrification is an opportunity for efficiency,” de Amicis said. “A tractor is pointless alone. It is intended to pull and provide energy for something else — for implements. There is a lot of opportunity because of the hydraulics in implements, and if we move to electrification, we can improve controllability.”
Beyond EV batteries
As much as CNH Industrial and other firms have been helped along their electrification journey by the size and maturity of the on-road electric vehicle market, further progress in the off-road area will require a tailored approach.
The next step involves forming new supply chain partnerships to develop a battery designed specifically for high-voltage systems, de Amicis said. “We can’t simply copy and paste what the automotive industry is doing. Due to the specific requirements linked with our environment, a customized solution is required.”
The decarbonization of the agriculture and construction industries is only just beginning. But equipment suppliers such as CNH Industrial are poised to overcome the technology challenges and accelerate the transition away from fossil energy.
By Amy Brown from Triple Pundit • Reposted: July 18, 2023
The world needs to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by almost half this decade to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius as recommended by climate scientists, the United Nation warns. As companies wrestle with how best to meet their net-zero targets, technology presents an important and powerful tool to determine which approaches will make the greatest impact.
“Technology plays a key role in untangling some of those challenges and helping organizations achieve net-zero,” says Salma Bakr, product lead at the sustainability software company FigBytes.
Several mitigation options costing less than $100 per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent could reduce global emissions by at least half by 2030 compared to 2019, according to the sixth assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Examples include using more renewable power generated from sources like solar and wind, transitioning to more fuel-efficient vehicles, and using more energy-efficient technologies.
That’s good news for the more than 90 percent of business leaders who say they prioritize long-term decarbonization. “Companies play a crucial role in tackling climate change and benefit from decarbonization by reducing risks like extreme weather events and policy changes,” Bakr says. “In the long run, and as more low-carbon solutions are adopted and become more affordable, decarbonizing a business saves operational costs and enhances efficiency, for example, where you pay lower bills for your energy and waste.”
Why technology is key to unlocking solutions for climate action
In the context of decarbonizing businesses, technology comes under two categories, Bakr explains: digital technologies that enable a net-zero future, and physical technologies for climate mitigation or adaptation.
These technologies complement each other in support of net-zero targets. For example, digital technologies enable efficient and scalable processing of climate data, allowing for more informed problem detection and decision-making. They also allow companies to evaluate multiple decarbonization solutions virtually and chart the best path forward, Bakr says. Together, digital technologies have the potential to reduce emissions by up to 20 percent by 2050 if scaled and adopted in high-emitting sectors like energy, materials and mobility, according to the World Economic Forum.
Physical technologies, on the other hand, enable climate mitigation and adaptation. The IPCC’s sixth assessment report shows that several of these technologies have high potential for GHG reduction at scale. For climate mitigation, this includes solar and wind power, energy-efficient appliances and lighting, and fuel-efficient vehicles. For climate adaptation, a key example is building resilient power systems which provide a diverse and stable energy supply.
How digital technologies can accelerate progress to net-zero
Digital technologies enhance decarbonization efforts in multiple ways, Bakr says. Even more good news: Organizations of all sizes across every industry already use many of these digital tools to ease their progress toward strategic goals — making it fairly seamless to digitize their approach to climate action as well.
For example, most businesses use foundational technologies to support daily tasks of measurement, reporting, and basic analytics for data-driven insights. Examples include enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, customer relationship management (CRM) systems, and supply chain tracking systems.
“This means organizations don’t have to start from scratch,” Bakr says. “For example, they can add sustainability solutions ‘on top’ of their existing systems.”
Organizations can also use decision-making technologies as part of the daily course of doing business, where machine learning can be leveraged, for example, to imitate how humans learn and ingest new data, which can improve decision-making accuracy, Bakr says. Such technologies also allow organizations to use historical data to forecast future events, or provide actionable recommendations to inform actions around decarbonization.
Another group of digital technologies increasingly embraced on the decarbonization journey are sensing and control technologies. These range from automation, robotics and drones to enhanced connectivity through the Internet of Things. By deploying these technologies, companies can more easily collect data from physical systems and more accurately control things like office temperature, humidity and lighting based on occupancy.
Yet another category are enabling technologies that support organizations to operate more efficiently. Examples include cloud computing and mobile communication, which allow organizations to scale their resources on-demand.
Technology advances ease climate accounting
“Tracking progress is crucial,” in pursuit of climate goals, “as net-zero is all about beating the clock and making progress,” Bakr says. “That’s why climate action needs climate accounting first, including a comprehensive emissions inventory. And the main challenge in establishing an emissions inventory is a data problem: data collection, consolidation, validation, verification and so on.”
This is where technology is an asset, she explains. A climate accounting solution collects, validates and verifies activity data, and conducts basic emissions modeling, reporting and analytics. Making that solution cloud-hosted “helps scale data collection, cross-collaboration across teams and geographies, and stakeholder engagement, where you can collect data from anywhere in the world and scale your computations as needed,” Bakr says.
Climate accounting systems can be integrated with decision-making technologies such as machine learning to augment the intelligence of an organization’s analytics, for example, to ensure the right emission factors are applied to calculate emissions data, she adds.
Companies and organizations that have set science-based targets should also keep watch on the “Progress Framework” under development by the Science Based Targets initiative, Bakr advises. It aims to advance the measurement, reporting and verification of science-based targets, providing clear and standardized expectations and guidance on how to measure, report and verify climate action progress against those targets.
This framework will support transparency and integrity by holding companies and financial institutions accountable for their climate targets. Development is expected to be completed at the 2023 U.N. Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC COP28) in Dubai in December.
Overcoming the challenge of future scenario planning
After the initial steps of streamlining a baseline emissions inventory and setting net-zero targets, an important but often challenging part of the decarbonization journey is the ability to forecast future emissions scenarios and understand associated risks and opportunities. “Many organizations find challenges in defining and analyzing net-zero scenarios,” Bakr says. “It’s a tricky and complicated process.”
But organizations can overcome that challenge by better understanding what is involved in a future climate scenario, she advises. “Scenarios should challenge business-as-usual assumptions about the future, but also illustrate a credible story comprising possible and consistent future events. Scenarios should also be relevant, meaning they explore future insights relating to the various implications of climate-related risks and opportunities. They should also be distinctive by exploring different permutations and combinations of key factors impacting future developments to generate multiple decarbonization alternatives for the organization to select from.”
Again, an organization can turn to technology to do this. “A solid climate accounting solution, coupled with decision-making capabilities, can help an organization forecast and visualize the future emissions associated with various scenarios based on the various data inputs considered,” Bakr says.
At the same time, technology isn’t a panacea, and it also has its own footprint to consider. “As we consider various technologies in the transition to net-zero, we need to also understand that those digital and physical technologies do produce emissions in one way or another,” she adds. “We need to take a systemic approach to tackling emissions reduction and stay on top of the latest research and development efforts.”
Inaction is not a possibility
Taking action is the only option, Bakr points out. “The journey to net-zero is bumpy but inevitable,” she says. Organizations can set themselves up for success with a solid climate action strategy that aligns net-zero targets with the latest climate science, and leverages technology to speed up the transition.
“This will make the net-zero journey as efficient, effective and consistent as possible,” she says. Crucially, the goal should be to invest in net-zero innovation that extends beyond any single organization’s value chain: “Focus on bold reductions, first and foremost. And if your progress strays, make sure you realign by identifying more reduction potentials.”
This article series is sponsored by FigBytes and produced by the TriplePundit editorial team.
Underwater view of the ocean surface. Image via Shutterstock/Dudarev Mikhail
What’s coming next for sustainability: Mining, oceans, artificial intelligence and justice. By Dylan Siegler from Greenbiz.com • July 18, 2023
Every July, a portal into the future opens. The near future. Say, one to three years out.
During this time of year, we look into that near-future-portal — the database of more than 500 proposed speakers to our February GreenBiz conference — and patterns, distinct from prior years, emerge. We see what the corporate sustainability ecosystem will be talking more and more about next.
I don’t mean decarbonization, data or climate tech, and I don’t mean supply chain issues, nature, Scope 3 emissions or DEI. Those make up the current canon of corporate sustainability priorities, whether your company has a sophisticated sustainability strategy or is just getting started. Combined, they were mentioned more than 1,500 times throughout proposed session descriptions — I ran the write-ups through an online word-frequency counter.
Those topics will certainly be covered at GreenBiz in February, but they were likely once first glimpsed through this proposal season wrinkle-in-time trick in prior years.
Here is a look at what’s just now hitting the Top 40 charts for the first time. It’s a non-exhaustive selection of topics that represent a view to the future of rising risks and opportunities that senior sustainability executives and rising stars are starting to grapple with and want to present or talk about with peers.
What you should have on your radar
Mining and critical minerals Our applicants have tuned in to the challenges around achieving global decarbonization, particularly the energy transition, given it requires critical minerals such as cobalt, lithium, copper and other materials often mined in geopolitically iffy regions.
A sustainability head at Oracle proposes to tease out how the auto industry is achieving traceability of some critical minerals (as well as human rights, carbon and other metrics) at scale using a blockchain platform. Consultancy ERM proposes to bring together reps from mining companies with stakes in critical minerals to talk successes and failures so far in sourcing these materials in response to “customer demand and government incentives like the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).” Others propose more potentially contentious dialogue: Positive takes on the controversial prospect of deep sea mining, and a celebration of a Nevada lithium mine project in an Endangered Species Act conflict.
Oceans The proposals we received this season were not only about protecting oceans, but using them. Multiple proposals promote seaweed as a solution. Seaweed-based yarn startup Keel Labs proposes to spotlight the “potential of the ocean to accelerate our planet’s development towards a more sustainable future,” while World Wildlife Fund proposes to “explore whether accelerating a market for seaweed could be a climate change solution.” Another swath of ideas from entrepreneurs position oceans as central to carbon removal.
A wave of ocean plastic-related proposals and other upstream-pollution-related content include a pitch from Dell and HP on “advancing commercially viable and socially-responsible ocean-bound plastics.”
Artificial intelligence The applications of AI proposed have gone from grand and theoretical to remarkably tactical. UL Solutions proposes a session on “how to write for AI and machine learning readers of ESG reports and communications, as these are the most ‘influential’ readers of ESG reports, parsing and mining company data for raters and rankers.” An SAP proposal promises to show how generative AI can help companies “achieve immediate transparency into their suppliers’ ESG profiles,” and Autocase offered to introduce an AI-assisted online decarbonization planning tool for real estate portfolios.
Justice This year social justice showed up in more intersectional, and specific, contexts than before, and from more innovators building justice into their business models. Supplements company Ritual pitched a session on identifying and tracking PFAS through the supply chain that would make “explicit intersections between sustainability, human rights, justice and traceability.”
Biomaterials startup erthos proposed to discuss how “the intersections of race, gender, social and economic status, and age influence how we view, engage, and protect our planet.” Startup GreenWealth Energy connected environmental justice and workforce development to public EV charging infrastructure funding by highlighting state and local government programs supporting under-resourced “community involvement in the electrification space.”
Is this everything you should be watching? No chance. Is there a good chance these topics will gain traction in the coming year? I’d bet on it. And if it’s something you should start to pay more attention to to help you do your job, we’ll include it in the GreenBiz 24 program. Speakers and sessions will start to be announced next month.
Entrepreneurs and business leaders can play a pivotal role in advancing the green building movement by transforming their offices into sustainable workspaces. Through these actionable steps, businesses can contribute to environmental sustainability while reaping benefits such as cost savings and improved workplace health.
By Ari Chazanas from Entrepreneur.com • Reposted: July 16, 2023
As concerns over climate change and environmental sustainability grow, green buildings represent a significant shift in the real estate development landscape. Defined as structures designed and managed to reduce their environmental impact, green buildings have become a focal point for businesses committed to environmental sustainability.
For entrepreneurs and business leaders, there’s an increasing responsibility — and indeed an opportunity — to transition their existing buildings or offices into greener spaces. Rooted in ecological stewardship, these architectural marvels are designed to minimize environmental impact through resource conservation and sustainability.
Energy efficiency: The first step toward green buildings
While green buildings represent a significant evolution in real estate, their implications go beyond the initial construction phase. Entrepreneurs and business leaders have a significant role to play in this green revolution. By transforming their offices into eco-friendly spaces, they can contribute to environmental preservation while fostering a healthier work environment and reducing operating costs.
Transforming an office into a green building involves several interconnected steps. The first is energy efficiency, a cornerstone of the green building philosophy. Efficient energy use not only reduces carbon emissions but also lessens reliance on non-renewable power sources. Energy efficiency is the backbone of any green building. By optimizing energy use, businesses can significantly reduce their carbon footprint. Replacing conventional lighting with energy-efficient LED or compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) can reduce energy consumption by up to 75%. Furthermore, intelligent lighting systems, such as those with occupancy sensors or natural light adjustments, can further minimize energy wastage.
High-performance appliances, rated by programs like ENERGY STAR, can offer significant energy savings over their conventional counterparts. Building automation systems, managing HVAC, lighting and other power systems, ensure energy is used only when needed, leading to substantial energy conservation. Green buildings, through energy-efficient design and sustainable practices, can lead to significant cost savings in the long run.
Harnessing renewable energy
To take the leap from energy efficiency to green energy, businesses can transition to renewable energy sources. Green buildings ideally source their power from renewable resources, thus reducing reliance on fossil fuels and minimizing carbon emissions. Installing solar panels, for instance, can help offset a significant portion of a building’s energy consumption.
If on-site generation is unfeasible, business leaders can explore renewable energy contracts. Numerous energy providers offer “green power” plans where the electricity is sourced from renewable energy projects. If installing renewable energy systems is not feasible, consider green energy contracts. Many energy providers offer plans where the electricity is sourced from renewable sources.
Water conservation and management
Water is another critical resource that can be managed more effectively. Small changes, like installing low-flow taps, toilets and urinals, can significantly reduce water consumption in the office. Going a step further, consider implementing a rainwater harvesting system. Rainwater can be collected, stored and used for non-drinking purposes, such as watering plants or flushing toilets. Low-flow fixtures, such as taps, toilets and urinals, can reduce water consumption by up to 20%.
Aside from installing low-flow fixtures and rainwater harvesting systems, businesses can explore other methods of conserving water. Greywater recycling systems, for instance, can treat and reuse water from sinks, showers and washing machines for non-potable uses like flushing toilets and irrigation. Businesses can also implement water-efficient landscaping, using native or drought-resistant plants, which require less water and maintenance. Ensuring regular maintenance to prevent leaks, which can lead to significant water wastage over time, is another practical step toward water conservation.
Waste management
Waste management is an essential component of a green office. Establishing recycling programs can ensure that waste materials such as paper, plastic, metal and electronics are properly disposed of and repurposed. If the office has a kitchen, consider composting food waste. Not only does this reduce the amount of waste going to landfills, but the resulting compost can be used to nourish office plants or donated to local community gardens. By establishing recycling programs, businesses can ensure that waste materials like paper, plastic and metal are properly disposed of and repurposed. Composting organic waste reduces the amount of waste going to landfills while producing nutrient-rich soil for use in landscaping.
Beyond recycling and composting, businesses can implement waste reduction strategies. This could involve going paperless, using digital alternatives for meetings and note-taking, and reducing unnecessary packaging in the office. Moreover, businesses can explore the concept of a circular economy, where resources are used for as long as possible, and at the end of their life, components are recovered and regenerated. This could involve initiatives like leasing office equipment or using modular furniture that can be easily repaired, upgraded or disassembled for recycling.
Enhancing indoor environmental quality
Good ventilation not only ensures an adequate supply of fresh air but also helps control indoor humidity levels, reducing the risk of mold growth. Businesses can also consider “thermal comfort,” which refers to maintaining a temperature range in which people feel comfortable. Thermal comfort depends on factors like air temperature, humidity, air movement and the type of clothing worn by people. The indoor environmental qualitysignificantly affects occupant health and productivity. Using low-VOC (volatile organic compounds) or VOC-free paints, adhesives and cleaning products reduces exposure to harmful chemicals. Additionally, incorporating indoor plants can improve air quality while creating a more calming and attractive environment.
Embarking on the journey to transform an office into a green building requires commitment and often investment. Still, the benefits — from cost savings and improved employee health to promoting a more sustainable future — make it a worthwhile endeavor. By taking these steps, entrepreneurs and business leaders are not just creating healthier, more sustainable workplaces. They are joining the green building revolution, contributing significantly to the future of sustainable real estate development and shaping the way we think about the spaces in which we work.
The evolution of the green building movement offers an array of opportunities for entrepreneurs and business leaders. By staying abreast of the latest green practices and technologies and fostering a culture of sustainability within their organizations, they can make a meaningful contribution to the environment while reaping tangible business benefits. It’s a win-win scenario, where businesses can bolster their bottom line while making strides towards a more sustainable and ecologically responsible world.
‘Regenerative’ has become the latest trend — a label that’s stuck on anything as a way of making it sound positive and reassuring. To guarantee genuine progress, we need a universal set of principles underpinning regenerative economics and a standardised way of quantifying success. By Amanda Powell-Smith from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: July 17, 2023
“Regenerative” is the new “sustainable.”
Globally, mentions of the word have gone up by 43 percent in online news stories and 282 percent on social media in the last year. Increasingly favoured by brands and companies to describe their positive approach to environmental challenges, regenerative is being stuck on everything from architecture to fashion, tea, travel, skincare and even leather.
But what does it really mean? Originally, it was mostly used to describe an approach to agriculture. Regenerative farming is about producing food while restoring degraded soils and depleted wildlife populations and plant species. In this context, the use of the word ‘regenerative’ makes sense — it’s about keeping living ecosystems in balance. Metrics exist to measure tangible outcomes, like an increased percentage of organic matter in the soil or an upswing in insect numbers. We can track change.
Things become trickier when we apply the term ‘regenerative’ to human systems. What does a regenerative economy look like and how do we judge its success? As things stand, the term remains too broad-brush to be able to answer these questions in a consistent and meaningful way.
When applied to economics, it bears many similarities to the idea of a wellbeing economy — which is about healing, recovery and recuperation. However, the use of the word ’wellbeing’ offers much greater clarity because an existing suite of metrics exists to enable measurement of both healthy people and a healthy planet.
For example, the World Health Organization provides global figures on life expectancy and mother-and-child mortality rates. Likewise, for the animal world, the International Union for Conservation of Nature updates a red list of wildlife at threat of extinction. Plant and tree species numbers can similarly be tracked; no equivalent exists for the descriptor ‘regenerative.’
To guarantee genuine progress, we need a universal set of principles underpinning regenerative economics and a standardised way of quantifying success. Otherwise, the ‘regenerative’ epithet will lose its meaning and become just another empty badge exploited by greenwashers and climate deniers alike.
For those of us working in communications, this means — as ever — being careful with our use of language. We mustn’t decide that the word ‘sustainable’ is no longer important or relevant. Its meaning is critical but remains widely misunderstood with many aligning it to the environment only — when it’s about building an inclusive and resilient future for both people and the planet.
The United Nations defines sustainable as ‘meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs;’ and we won’t achieve that without the repair, renewal and regeneration of our natural world.
We can’t let ‘regenerative’ become the latest trend — a label that’s stuck on anything as a way of making it sound positive and reassuring. Those who want to use words such as ‘sustainable’ and ‘regenerative’ must always ally them with real substance, thought and impact. Words are important and what they stand for matters to us all.
Over two-thirds of consumers between the ages of 18 and 34 are likely to purchase from companies committed to Sustainability. From Viant • Reposted: July 17, 2023
IRVINE, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Jun. 6, 2023– Viant Technology Inc.(NASDAQ: DSP), a leading people-based advertising technology company, today released the findings from its new Consumer Sustainability Study, revealing that over two-thirds of consumers between the ages of 18 and 34 are likely to purchase from companies committed to sustainability. Furthermore, of the more than 1,000 consumers surveyed, 69 percent agreed that businesses have a responsibility to reduce their environmental impact. As sustainability priorities continue to grow among brands, Viant’s new report underscores the importance of sustainability for consumers and how sustainability is a key driver of consumer purchasing decisions.
Key takeaways from Viant’s Consumer Sustainability Study:
When it comes to sustainability, consumers prefer action over words: When asked how important it was for brands to take action towards reducing their carbon footprint, versus just talking about their commitment to sustainability, 65 percent of consumers cited that action was important.
Gen Z and Millennials hold businesses accountable for sustainability: Consumers 18-34 years old feel most strongly that businesses have a responsibility to reduce their environmental impact, more so than those 35 and older.
Renewable energy can positively impact brand perception, especially among younger consumers: Almost three-quarters (74%) of consumers between the ages of 18 and 34 expressed that they would view a brand positively if they are utilizing renewable energy sources. When analyzing all age groups (18+) surveyed, 67 percent of consumers cited that they would view a brand positively if they are utilizing renewable energy sources.
“Our latest research demonstrates that consumers are increasingly looking for brands to not only talk about sustainability and about reducing their carbon footprint, but to take real action,” said Jon Schulz, Chief Marketing Officer, Viant. “As sustainability remains top of mind for both brands and their customers, we are pleased to offer our clients a number of leading-edge solutions, including our Adtricity program, which help brands take real action to achieve their sustainability goals.”
To further support brands and agencies in understanding their carbon footprint from advertising, this week Viant launched its new Carbon Emissions Calculator to help advertisers assess the carbon impact of their digital campaigns.
To learn more about the findings from Viant’s Consumer Sustainability Study, please click here.
About Viant’s Consumer Sustainability Study
This survey was fielded online and reached a total of n=1,197 respondents. Respondents were consumers in the US (18+) who were representative of the national population. The survey was fielded between May, 1st, 2023 – May, 2nd, 2023.
By Benson Hill via Food Dive • Reposted: July 12, 2023
The question was simple, yet profound.
We were at a recent conference where startups were pitching creative products to meet the needs of our changing world. The audience was full of executives and investors with the cumulative financial power to fund those changes.
During a conversation about upcycling, a leader from a global CPG beverage powerhouse raised his hand and asked the speaker, “How do you know what you’re doing is the best possible use?”
At first, a few of us were puzzled. Then he explained it was his job to find the best use of their time and money when it came to environmental, social and governance-related initiatives (ESG).
With more options available today for CPG food and beverage manufacturers to create workstreams and dedicate resources to certain initiatives, how do they choose which ones to green light? How do they know where to start or who to trust? And how do they influence authentic action while operating in times of unparalleled scrutiny?
The business world is becoming increasingly more conscious of the impact of ESG, and the food and beverage industry stands at the forefront of industries that can make a positive impact. Many of these companies want to do the right things, but they’re grappling with a unique set of challenges. They strive to avoid greenwashing. They try to reduce their carbon footprint. They focus on minimizing food waste, ensuring ethical sourcing and fostering diversity all the way back to the farm level.
Their willingness to grow and learn means the stage is set for great ESG growth. However, there are still complex hurdles to clear as they sprint from the desire to change to the finish line of ESG-related ROI.
ESG moves the needle, but is it enough?
The good news is positive consumer sentiment toward sustainability and ESG-related purchases have been growing. But there are still gray areas between how customers say they want to live and shop vs. what they actually purchase. Consider this research:
A recent analysis by McKinsey and NielsenIQ found products making ESG-related claims averaged 28% cumulative growth over the last five years (2018-2022), compared to 20% growth for products that made no ESG-related claims.
Meanwhile, an October NielsenIQ report found 78% of consumer respondents said a sustainable lifestyle is important to them.
The ESG-related retail growth stats, while significant, suggest customers don’t always buy sustainable products at a rate that backs up how they say they feel.
So why don’t they? Forty-one percent of NielsenIQ respondents said sustainable products are too expensive, while 35% said it’s hard to find ESG-related products at the store. And perhaps the most telling stat may be who they see as responsible for driving sustainability product changes: 46% said brands were responsible, 40% said local government was responsible and only 37% pointed at consumers themselves.
That misalignment of expectations may further confound CPG executives trying to make the best possible use of their budget when funding ESG products and initiatives. But it does bring one thing into relief: Short of government regulation forcing product changes, evolution in the ESG space rests on CPG’s shoulders.
A framework for vetting potential ESG partners
There are no instant ESG solutions in the CPG space. The sustainability evolution inside your company – and in the market as a whole – requires a staged approach and a fundamental adoption of new ways of working.
That’s why it’s imperative you start your ESG product innovation journey now. Your CPG brand must fully vet, substantiate and compare multiple initiatives to ensure it’s making the right choices.
Savitha Chelladurai, Benson Hill’s Director, ESG & Sustainability, said CPG leaders should think about these five things when evaluating with ESG innovators:
Look for partners – not just suppliers: Find innovators who are willing to develop programs or products together to meet your specific needs.
Validate affluency in ESG: Look for innovators who show they understand your current state and goals, and can help you lead in the space.
Connectors: Find innovators who can bring other partners to the table to jointly develop holistic solutions.
A complete view of sustainability: Find innovators who understand how sustainability goals affect your full organization.
Identify quick wins: Partner with innovators who can implement solutions that work within the context of your current business model, allowing you to see immediate impact while working through longer-term investment and infrastructure changes.
Food and beverage companies know they must redefine their product offerings for all of us to have a sustainable future. But before they can do that, they need ESG innovators to clearly answer the original, crucial question: Is this the best possible use?
Reframe your reaction to the new reporting regimen. Here’s how it can benefit you — and your company. By Dylan Siegler, SVP, Sustainability, GreenBiz Group • Reposted: July 11, 2023
At our GreenFin 23 conference last month, disclosure was on the lips of everyone from Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse to Shirley Lu, assistant professor of business administration at Harvard Business School, to Brendan Morrissey, Walmart’s vice president, ESG. But while many speakers at GreenFin proclaimed a reassuring “you got this” from the stage, practitioners in the audience weren’t so sure.
Some of the top worries I heard included:
New compliance structures and frameworks raise the stakes significantly in a field where voluntary (ergo, occasionally squishy) reporting has been the norm. Consequences of not complying with CSRD, for example, will be up to EU member states, and will range from public shaming to cease-and-desist orders to fines.
While simplification and harmonization may happen in the medium term, for now the disparate standards add complexity and uncertainty for disclosers.
Human and technological resources to learn, execute on and adapt to this new paradigm are scarce — and as a result, projects that deliver tangible climate, nature and community benefits will suffer (and so will sustainability staff).
Further, in many companies, these new disclosure rules hit a nerve not because there is anything much to hide, but because they call for cooperation and lock-step alignment in precisely the areas where there is most often dysfunction: Misalignment between sustainability and other key business functions such as finance, legal and risk. Disarray behind the shiny, corporate-comms-approved veneer of the typical annual sustainability or ESG report. Shallow commitments where a deep sustainability strategy with buy-in from the Board on down should be.
That doesn’t even include the many companies without an existing materiality assessment; accounting for GHG emissions in homespun spreadsheets or not yet accounting for them at all; not engaging in third-party verification or attestation of their disclosures; inexperience with Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures reporting; or lacking budget for a consultant or a data platform.
The new disclosure paradigm may force companies to clean up the house the way I do when surprise guests call from down the block to say they’re dropping by — that is, quickly, but not thoroughly.
But the new sustainability reporting rules can be a strategic opportunity, too
An ESG professional I spoke with who didn’t have corporate sign-off to be quoted on the record offered a positive and useful way to reframe that disclosure panic.
In essence, he said, take a page from companies that have reported ESG data en route to an IPO, and make disclosure serve you. Recent studies demonstrate that solid voluntary ESG disclosures of environmental and social issues material to the business (such as emissions, human rights, and supply chain considerations) can help fledgling public companies’ valuations — even if you’re not Allbirds.
I found the redirect inspiring. Rather than a test you cram for, it’s possible to consider disclosure a talent show, and start rehearsing. You typically can’t pick and choose which metrics you respond to, but you can choose what you focus your limited energy and time on in the run-up, and make it count.
Don’t just fill in the blanks. Develop insights you can draw on outside the disclosure context: what’s material, what risks are relevant and what your stakeholders care about. All of these elements will be unique to your business.
Filling in the blanks does, of course, matter. Lean on your voluntary disclosures — if you’ve reported to CDP, you are at least part way there.
Get cozy with Comms, Legal, Finance, Risk, etc., and build a playbook together so none of what you learn is lost. It may be your company’s first rodeo, but it won’t be your last.
This much is clear: Disclosure will bring more attention to your work, especially internally. Focus on what matters, and the result could almost make it worth the pain.
Sustainability in furniture manufacturing is based on a symbiotic relationship between manufacturers and consumers, that places responsibility on both sides of the supply and demand equation, says Bisley’s Operations Director, Paul Crutcher.
There’s no doubt that we as furniture manufacturers must lead the way in innovating and developing sustainability in their furniture and interiors solutions for our homes and workspaces. However, for this to be possible there is a necessity for consumers to require it. The marketplace must demand sustainable furniture solutions, otherwise the incentive for manufacturers to enthusiastically pursue a sustainable agenda based on net zero principles will diminish.
Essentially, in the modern commercial world, both suppliers and consumers have a direct role to play in ensuring the implementation of sustainable practices. And each must hold the other to account.
Fortunately the manufacturing sector is now largely beginning to move in a sustainable direction, with ethical firms and organisations clearly stating, publishing and auditing their sustainable credentials and practices.
At Bisley, our commitment to sustainable manufacturing practices, outlined in our ‘Green Book’ is core to our operating philosophy. We often use the phrase that our furniture is ‘made for life’, and while that is true of our products, we also take that ethos into every part of our manufacturing processes and company culture.
We want furniture that lasts a lifetime for our customers; made from the highest quality materials, using the latest innovative technologies and processes with minimum impact on our environment.
And we’re not alone. Across the manufacturing spectrum there are companies truly revolutionising the way they work in pursuit of a net zero agenda.
However, I often worry that while many manufacturers in the furniture sector, in which I operate, are really drilling down on their sustainability agendas, there are those who are not, and it is my belief that many consumers may not know the difference. Especially when you consider that there is rather a lot of ‘green washing’ going on out there.
For example, do consumers know the questions to ask, and the touch points to look for, when trying to identify a sustainably led furniture manufacturer or brand, from one that does little to contribute to our collective net zero agenda?
And on the flip side, are we as a sector articulating our sustainability credentials effectively to consumers, so that their knowledge is broadened? I think in both these areas, there is definite room for improvement.
So what should consumers be looking for when it comes to making conscious purchasing decisions about furniture for their homes and workplaces?
Legitimate and sector specific accreditations
A good place to start with identifying sustainable manufacturers and brands is to look for their industry recognised green certifications. These will no doubt be published on their websites, so if they’re not there, then chances are it’s because they don’t have any – a red flag. And if you’re a manufacturer that isn’t shouting about your green accreditations – it’s time to start. Remember it’s a two way street.
Fair Trade, Global Recycled Standard and Certified B Corporation are all good examples of well known accreditations that are widely recognised as denoting a sustainable company or organisation.
However, best practice certifications vary from sector to sector meaning there is no one size fits all label that clearly proclaims a company to be a sustainability champion, making it tricky for consumers to be confident in their purchasing decisions.
As a British furniture manufacturer Bisley has memberships and accreditations with a wide range of bodies, including the Furniture Industry Sustainability Programme (FISP), which is recognised as the benchmark for sustainable practices in the UK furniture industry. It is widely referenced by procurement teams and furniture specifiers as a key part of an organisations sustainable procurement policies.
The message to consumers here is – do your research. The firms that are working to sustainable standards will let you know about it and have the creds to back it up.
Materials and the circular economy
Historically, the approach to resource consumption has been very much linear (take, make, use, dispose). But things are changing as companies become more and more aware of circular economy principles, especially within the product design phase.
In essence, the circular economy aims to reduce finite natural resource extraction, so basically, our aim is to keep goods in circulation longer, so we don’t have to take more things out of the ground, and at Bisley we encourage the use of materials with a higher recycled and recyclable content.
To help achieve this, alongside general and vital energy efficiency measures within our workspaces and places, at Bisley we have been looking at the products we create from a more macro perspective.
For example, we consider a product’s full lifecycle – from upstream material extraction and processing through to end of product life. Essentially, when you’re looking at that product, you’re not just looking at the product itself. We should also be considering things like – where did those materials come from? And what’s the expected life span of the product? How will this product ultimately be disposed of? All manufactured products need to be considered from a circular economy perspective – both upstream and downstream.
However, from a consumer perspective – what does all of this mean and what kind of things should people be looking for? There are a number of ways to go about identifying companies that operate with a circular economy based ethos, but a few key pointers include:
Being repair friendly: Products will naturally degrade overtime which is when many get replaced. However furniture manufacturers can help slow the turnover process by designing pieces with easy to access/repair modular features with interchangeable spare parts and accessories, such as drawer slides or door hinges, across a wide product portfolio.
Can a product be upgraded/evolved easily?: Firms that can supply add-ons, product spin-offs (e.g – exchangeable doors or new hardware like handles), or refurbishment services can help extend a product’s purpose and lifecycle.
Take back schemes: Some firms offer take back schemes, which means that used and unwanted furniture, and their various component parts, many of which can be recycled, do not end up in landfills.
Packaging
When it comes to packaging there is so much that can be done to operate in a more sustainable way – from managing the packaging that raw materials arrive in at a manufacturing facility, to the packaging in which products are delivered to retailers/consumers – the second of these points being something that consumers are becoming more aware of, and prone to publicly calling out brands that utilise excessive, toxic packaging.
As a result it’s something that most manufacturers are becoming increasingly more savvy about.
From a waste management perspective, at Bisley over the past 12 months, 98% of manufacturing waste was recycled or diverted from landfill. This includes cardboard and plastic wrap waste from input materials and components, which are collected and baled on-site then sold back to our packaging suppliers.
Our approach to the packaging our products leave the factory in is similarly conscious and baked in from the product concept stage and right through the design process, in order to minimise materials and to help maximise space and efficiency during the transportation process.
Similarly many manufacturers are also utilising packaging materials that are made in the UK in order to shorten supply chains, and trialling new, almost infinitely recyclable packaging materials. These are things that consumers will likely be less aware of, so manufacturers and brands should make a point about publishing information about their efforts to improve their packaging processes on their websites. Share positive information.
Paul Crutcher is Operations Director at Bisley, with responsibility for Procurement, Manufacturing and Logistics. Photo: Bisley
Transportation
Despite the trend for the offshoring of production across multiple sectors over the past twenty-five years, many firms who initially embraced the concept are now beginning to swim against the tide and return home, largely led by rises in overseas wages and the time and cost involved in shipping goods great distances, among other factors.
And this is a trend that has been exacerbated by the pandemic. The onset of Covid saw those companies with longer, more complex supply chains scattered across the globe, experience complete production paralysis. And because of this onshoring, or at the very least, nearshoring of organisational supply bases is being activated across numerous sectors, so products are not stranded tens of thousands of miles away, and are near, or close to, their end market in the event of a global catastrophe. It’s a trend that is already in action in the big tech sector, with firms like Apple, Amazon, Samsung and Google moving production out of China in light of geostrategic concerns.
But also economic/supply chain issues aside, sustainability factors are at play here. After all, shipping goods halfway around the world, from their production sites to their end markets, is not a good approach to reducing carbon outputs. Which is why onshoring/near shoring is becoming increasingly more appealing to firms who are looking to deliver on net zero targets.
At Bisley, a company that has always remained true to its ‘Made in Britain’ values and never offshored manufacturing, it’s a trend we welcome. And while we do export to different global territories, our largest market remains the UK, which is why we manufacture here. That and the fact that British manufacturing is a hallmark of excellence.
With this in mind, I would suggest to consumers that have an interest in sustainability – to check where goods are made, and interrogate this rigorously to avoid brand washing. Products made and sold in the UK come with a significantly reduced carbon footprint attached to them than those made in Asia for example. Not to mention a greater likelihood of delivering on circular economy principles – like the availability of spare parts and repairability designed to extend product life cycles – outlined previously.
Smoke rises from a brush fire near Hollywood Hills in Los Angeles in 2007. Hector Mata/AFP via Getty Images
Over the past two decades, a staggering 21.8 million Americans found themselves living within 3 miles (5 kilometers) of a large wildfire. Most of those residents would have had to evacuate, and many would have been exposed to smoke and emotional trauma from the fire. By Mojtaba Sadegh, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, Boise State University via The Conversation • Reposted: July 9, 2023
Over the past two decades, a staggering 21.8 million Americans found themselves living within 3 miles (5 kilometers) of a large wildfire. Most of those residents would have had to evacuate, and many would have been exposed to smoke and emotional trauma from the fire.
Nearly 600,000 of them were directly exposed to the fire, with their homes inside the wildfire perimeter.
Those statistics reflect how the number of people directly exposed to wildfires more than doubled from 2000 to 2019, my team’s new research shows.
That knowledge has implications for how communities prepare to fight wildfires in the future, how they respond to population growth and whether policy changes such as increasing insurance premiums to reduce losses will be effective. It’s also a reminder of what’s at risk from human activities, such as fireworks on July 4, a day when wildfire ignitions spike.
I am a climate scientist who studies the wildfire-climate relationship and its socioenvironmental impacts. For the new study, colleagues and I analyzed the annual boundaries of more than 15,000 large wildfires across the Lower 48 states and annual population distribution data to estimate the number of people exposed to those fires.
Not every home within a wildfire boundary burns. If you picture wildfire photos taken from a plane, fires generally burn in patches rather than as a wall of flame, and pockets of homes survive.
We found that 80% of the human exposure to wildfires – involving people living within a wildfire boundary from 2000 to 2019 – was in Western states.
California stood out in our analysis. More than 70% of Americans directly exposed to wildfires were in California, but only 15% of the area burned was there.
Hot, dry weather pulls moisture from plants and soil, leaving dry fuel that can easily burn. On a windy day – such as California often sees during its hottest, driest months – a spark, for example from a power line, campfire or lightning, can start a wildfire that quickly spreads.
Recent research published in June 2023 shows that almost all of the increase in California’s burned area in recent decades has been due to anthropogenic climate change – meaning climate change caused by humans.
Our new research looked beyond just the area burned and asked: Where were people exposed to wildfires, and why?
New homes on the edges of cities have been caught in some fires, like the one in Santa Rosa in 2017. But most of the people exposed were in neighborhoods existing well before 2000. George Rose/Getty Images
We found that while the population has grown in the wildland-urban interface, where houses intermingle with forests, shrublands or grasslands, that accounted for only about one-quarter of the increase in the number of humans directly exposed to wildfires across the Lower 48 states from 2000 to 2019.
Three-quarters of that 125% increase in exposure was due to fires’ increasingly encroaching on existing communities. The total burned area increased only 38%, but the locations of intense fires near towns and cities put lives at risk.
The 2018 fire that destroyed Paradise, Calif., began as a small vegetation fire that ignited new fires as the wind blew its embers. NIST
Wildfires in the high mountains in recent decades provide another way to look at the role that rising temperatures play in increasing fire activity.
High mountain forests have few cars, homes and power lines that could spark fires, and humans have historically done little to clear brush there or fight fires that could interfere with natural fire regimes. These regions were long considered too wet and cool to regularly burn. Yet my team’s past research showed fires have been burning there at unprecedented rates in recent years, mainly because of warming and drying trends in the Western U.S.
What can communities do to lower the risk?
Wildfire risk isn’t slowing. Studies have shown that even in conservative scenarios, the amount of area that burns in Western wildfires is projected to grow in the next few decades.
How much these fires grow and how intense they become depends largely on warming trends. Reducing emissions will help slow warming, but the risk is already high. Communities will have to both adapt to more wildfires and take steps to mitigate their impacts.
Developing community-level wildfire response plans, reducing human ignitions of wildfires and improving zoning and building codes can help prevent fires from becoming destructive. Building wildfire shelters in remote communities and ensuring resources are available to the most vulnerable people are also necessary to lessen the adverse societal impacts of wildfires.
A lack of access to safe water — coupled with socioeconomic disparities, aging infrastructure and natural disasters — is accelerating a downward spiral in quality of life for more than 2 million Americans, according to a new Xylem report. By Gary E. Frank from Triple Pundit • Reposted: July 9, 2023
The global water technology company’s analysis looks to raise public awareness of a growing water crisis in the U.S., said Austin Alexander, Xylem’s vice president for sustainability and social impact. It spotlights the increasing challenges rural communities in the United States face because of limited water access and poor water quality.
“Once you have awareness of the issue, then we can start talking about solutions and funding and all those things that can help fill the gap,” Alexander said. “But we really are just in a moment, I think, of many Americans not realizing the extent of the issue in our own backyard.”
A rural water crisis is brewing in our own backyards
More than 46 million Americans, 15 percent of the total U.S. population, live in rural areas, according to the 2020 Census. How they access water, the quality of that water, and if they get water at all is far from certain.
Persistent and serious water quality problems are increasingly common throughout the U.S. In both urban and rural areas, deteriorating water infrastructure and ineffective water treatment facilities can cause contamination in water flowing through the tap. Rural residents who get their water from wells are also at risk, as agricultural runoff, pollutants, and stormwater can seep in and cause contamination. As groundwater levels decline across the country, a growing number of wells are also at risk of running dry.
In addition to the 2 million Americans without access to safe drinking water, millions more might be exposed to contaminated water from wells and small systems that are not regulatedby the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The circumstances for water systems covered by EPA regulations are not much better. From 2016 to 2019, nearly 130 million U.S. residents got their drinking water from systems that violated the federal Safe Water Drinking Act, according to an analysis of 50,000 active community water systems conducted by the Natural Resources Defense Council. Small water systems — those that serve less than 3,300 people in mainly rural communities — were responsible for more than 80 percent of all violations.
What can we do?
Xylem’s report offers a range of recommendations for individuals, businesses, nonprofits and governments looking to address these problems. The actionable steps include increasing investment in water infrastructure and expanding access to financing for rural water systems. Local tax dollars alone are generally not enough for small communities to finance water infrastructure upgrades. While state and federal aid programs exist, they’re often competitive and fall short of what’s needed, experts say. The report calls out awareness-building and public-private partnerships as a means of improving infrastructure in rural communities and filling the existing gaps.
The company also pinpoints smart water technology as having high potential for rural communities. As TriplePundit’s Kate Zerrenner has previously reported, “Having a smart system in place can provide real-time monitoring to respond to emergency situations and, optimally, mitigate damage and enhance emergency response time as well as improve the speed of recovery.” But again, rural communities need funding to put such systems into place.
On that front, Xylem has also taken steps to address the water crisis itself. The company works closely with government officials and advocacy groups, such as the Water Systems Council (WSC), on public policy to solve domestic water challenges.
Along with the WSC, Xylem helped lobby Congress for the 2016 passage of the WIIN Act, which includes provisions to help small and economically disadvantaged communities improve access to safe, reliable water. The company brings water to additional families in need through its Watermark program in partnership with the WSC’s nonprofit arm Water Well Trust.
Xylem also works with the Chris Long Foundation’s Waterboys initiative and the Water Well Trust to bring further awareness to domestic water issues. In 2021, their partnership installed a new well for a family in Bertram, Texas, who lived without running water for nearly four years after their existing well collapsed. The partnership has completed similar projects in Oregon, Virginia, North Carolina, Illinois, Georgia and Missouri.
Public awareness sparks action on the water crisis
The Xylem report examines the American dimensions of a growing global problem that is becoming more acute and disruptive. About 2 billion people on the planet lack access to safe drinking water, and 3.6 billion lack access to safely managed sanitation, according to the World Bank.
“Gaps in access to water supply and sanitation, growing populations, more water-intensive patterns of growth, increasing rainfall variability, and pollution are combining in many places to make water one of the greatest risks to economic progress, poverty eradication and sustainable development,” an overview from the World Bank reads.
Despite these challenges, Alexander is hopeful that increased public awareness of the water crisis could help spark more action to find and implement solutions.
“I don’t think we’ve seen a moment in time where the water crisis has been in the headlines and gaining so much attention as it is today,” she said. “We’re on the precipice of a mindset change among the general public that these issues are real, they’re here and we have to address them.”
As more companies are embracing ESG strategies, we take a look at the top 10 businesses from around the world that are leading by example By Lucy Buchholz from Sustainability magazine • Reposted: July 9, 2023
SG strategies enable businesses to navigate the shifting tides of sustainability. By integrating environmental considerations into their operations, companies can reduce their carbon footprint, conserve resources, and contribute to protecting the planet.
ESG goes beyond just “green” initiatives, extending to the realm of social responsibility, where businesses embrace DEI. By prioritising social impact, companies foster an inclusive work environment, attract top talent, and build strong relationships with stakeholders who seek partnerships with organisations that share their values. Using datasets from Just Capital, we rounded up the top 10 ESG strategies from some of the world’s largest companies leading the way to positive climate action.
Cisco Systems Inc., commonly known as Cisco, has pledged its intentions to achieve net-zero emissions across all categories by 2040. Additionally, the tech giant established an interim objective to attain net-zero emissions for global Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions by 2025.
In its Purpose report, Cisco emphasised several accomplishments related to ESG initiatives. Notably, the company has made substantial contributions – amounting to US$477m – for community programmes.
As one of the largest telecom providers in the US, Verizon has emerged as a leading company at the forefront of ESG initiatives. The company has announced its commitment to generating renewable energy equivalent to 50% of its annual electricity consumption by 2025, while taking significant steps to address e-waste.
Verizon’s ESG strategy is built upon four pillars: governance, integration, engagement, and reporting. These pillars work together in a dynamic manner, providing a foundation for informed decision-making, genuine engagement, transparent communication and effective governance.
American multinational technology company NVIDIA Corporation is committed to acquiring or producing sufficient renewable energy to offset 100% of its worldwide electricity consumption. The company’s H100 GPUs, built on the cutting-edge Hopper architecture, boast an impressive 26x energy efficiency advantage over CPUs based on inferencing benchmarks. Demonstrating its dedication to environmental sustainability, NVIDIA proudly claims to power the most efficient supercomputer listed on the Green500 ranking for November 2022.
According to Apple Inc’s latest ESG report, the company has successfully avoided 23 million metric tonnes of emissions across all scopes. In its efforts to further reduce carbon emissions, Apple is actively pursuing environmentally-friendly designs – for instance, the transition to the Apple M1 chip in the 13-inch MacBook Pro has resulted in an 8% reduction in the product’s carbon footprint. Approximately 20% of the materials used Apple’s products are made from recycled content, and by 2030, the company aims to be carbon neutral.
As part of its environmental sustainability efforts, PayPal has set a target to achieve net-zero emissions by 2040. The business also recognises that effective management of ESG risks and opportunities is integral to advancing its strategy and generating value for its stakeholders. The company’s ESG strategy reflects its comprehensive approach to these issues across the organisation, categorised into four key dimensions: responsible business practices, social innovation, employees and culture, and environmental sustainability.
The Bank of America has set a goal to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions across its financing activities, operations, and supply chain prior to 2050. Through its Environmental Business Initiative, the bank aims to mobilise and deploy US$1tn by 2030 to expedite the transition towards a sustainable, low-carbon economy. Bank of America is also advancing the sustainability of its operations, having accomplished carbon neutrality and procured 100% renewable electricity in 2019, exceeding their targets a year ahead of schedule.
Salesforce’s ESG initiatives revolve around creating a sustainable, low-carbon future with a carbon-neutral cloud, while striving to be a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions company and working towards achieving 100% renewable energy for global operations.
Salesforce also champions equality through initiatives focused on equal rights, pay, education and opportunity. The company’s pioneering 1-1-1 integrated philanthropy model inspires other companies by leveraging equity, employee time, and products to make a positive impact on communities worldwide.
In 2020, Microsoft unveiled its sustainability commitments, outlining plans for fostering a more sustainable future. By 2030, Microsoft aims to achieve carbon negativity, removing more historical emissions than it has generated since its establishment in 1975.
The tech giant also strives to be water positive by 2030, replenishing more water than it has consumed. Additionally, Microsoft aims to achieve zero waste across their direct waste footprint by 2030, as well as actively working to protect and preserve ecosystems.
Intel Corporation has committed to achieve net-zero GHG across its global operations by 2040, a remarkable feat in an industry known for its emissions. The manufacturing sector in the US alone contributes to approximately 23% of direct carbon emissions, making Intel’s dedication to ESG goals even more noteworthy.
In 2021, Intel demonstrated its progress in energy conservation, saving around 486 million kilowatt hours of electricity compared to the baseline date. Additionally, the company successfully reduced its total GHG emissions by 2% from the previous year.
To further its energy-saving initiatives, Intel has allocated approximately US$300m for investments in energy conservation at its facilities, aiming to achieve a cumulative energy saving of 4bn/kWh.
Intel’s dedication to ESG practices and its significant investments in energy conservation demonstrate its determination to combat climate change and contribute to a more sustainable future.
Google’s parent company, Alphabet, has dedicated the entire net proceeds from its US$5.75bn Sustainability Bond to support environmentally and socially-responsible projects.
In August 2020, Alphabet successfully issued the largest sustainability bond in history. The funds generated from this issuance have been used to finance both new and ongoing initiatives that address critical issues aligned with the company’s mission and long-term value creation goals.
Google’s sustainability strategy revolves around three key pillars, including accelerating the transition to carbon-free energy and a circular economy; empowering individuals and communities through technology; and creating positive impacts for the people and places where Google operates.
By actively focusing on these pillars, Alphabet and Google are committed to having a meaningful impact on global sustainability and promoting positive change for the benefit of society, its employees, and stakeholders.
By Dave Armon via Triplepundit.com • Reposted: July 7, 2023
Amid climate change denial and cries of “go woke, go broke” from the extreme right, at least one large U.S. investment bank has identified bipartisan support for sustainability investments that are likely to yield big returns without political drama.
Modernizing the U.S. power grid, fortifying climate-vulnerable regions, supporting carbon-removal technologies, and eliminating college education as a hiring requirement are economic drivers with support from both Democrats and Republicans, Aniket Shah, global head of ESG and sustainable finance strategy at the global investment banking firm Jefferies, told corporate sustainability executives and bankers at the GreenFin conference in Boston.
“If you work in our field of [environmental, social and governance (ESG)] investing and green finance, you are used to division and pessimism,” Shah said. “But we think there is a bigger story, which is that there are very clear areas of agreement and, therefore, optimism on ESG matters between policymakers, corporates, and civil society of different political persuasions and world views.”
Culture wars are spilling over into brand reputation and consumer buying habits. Bud Light lost billions in revenue in a boycott that began when the formerly top-selling beer sent a customized can to a transgender social media influencer. Target was assailed for selling Pride Month merchandise. Even a brand long associated with Christian conservatives, Chick-fil-A, was criticized for a hire it made years ago to improve diversity, equity and inclusion at the quick-service restaurant chain.
But passage of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law demonstrates there’s broad agreement from Democrats and Republicans on investments to accelerate and strengthen the economy, said Shah, who teaches at Columbia University in addition to his management role at Jefferies.
“They say the first step in solving any problem is to admit that you have one — and for the energy transition we have a significant problem in the U.S. grid, which is simply outdated for the major renewable buildout that is beginning in this country and underdeveloped in terms of transmission lines needed,” said Shah, citing Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory data estimating the new grid will be 50 percent larger than today’s, and consisting of 95 percent wind, solar and battery storage.
However, regulatory approval for new renewable power projects now takes more than four years, and transmission projects require six and a half years, Shah said, calling for an overhaul of the U.S. permitting policies.
There is political consensus to invest in climate adaptation, Shah said, pointing to $400 billion in economic damage in red and blue states due to storms, flooding, wildfires and other disasters. In June alone, the largest California property insurer stopped underwriting policies, while rates in Florida rose 50 percent, he said.
“We think technologies ranging from precision agriculture, to construction, to water-desalination, to weather intelligence and more will become increasingly important to the U.S. economy and therefore interesting places for investors to invest,” said Shah, predicting a federal plan for adaptation and resilience will be published by the Joe Biden White House.
Investment in technology to remove carbon from the atmosphere will also receive bipartisan support, Shah claimed.
“To achieve global net-zero goals, we will need to remove approximately 10 gigatons of CO2 per year from the atmosphere by 2050 for every year going forward, a several order of magnitude increase from where we are today,” he said, heralding new industries that are both nature-based and engineered will be scaled up worldwide.
Outside environmental investments, Shah pointed to the tightening U.S. labor market as a significant risk equally impacting conservative and liberal regions. He pointed to Gallup research showing sharply higher support among Democrats and Republicans for labor unions.
Employers are responding, eliminating a college degree as a requirement for a job at select companies and in multiple states including Alaska, Colorado, Maryland and Pennsylvania, Shah said. Other trends to make jobs more appealing include remote work and four-day work weeks for many white-collar roles.
“There is a growing realization that the United States is facing major worker shortfalls for the twin policies of reshoring manufacturing and accelerating decarbonization,” said Shah, citing predictions for 550,000 additional clean energy jobs by 2030, including electricians and construction roles where there are already shortages.
“This is a problem that will need to get solved,” he said. “It’s a problem that exists in states of all political persuasions, and therefore will get solved.”
Dave Armon is the Chief Executive Officer of 3BL Media, which produces the 3BL Forum and ranks the 100 Best Corporate Citizens. A former journalist, Dave spent 20 years in management at PR Newswire, where he was president and COO.
A new Forrester report shows how and why to launch an active sustainability strategy. By John Edwards, Technology Journalist & Author from Information Week • Reposted: July 6, 2023
When it comes to creating an environmental sustainability agenda, many firms do little more than announcing vague plans and goals.
A recent Forrester report finds that as many enterprises dawdle, customers and other stakeholders are increasingly demanding authentic and effective environmental sustainability initiatives and strategies that demonstrate an understanding of and commitment to tomorrow amid growing economic and geopolitical uncertainties.
The report also notes that while many enterprise architects and their teams are well positioned to prepare their organizations for the next wave of optimization, transformation, and disruption — having worked on sustainability initiatives for decades — many more enterprises are just beginning their planning.
The challenge facing sustainability planners is that while most enterprises believe sustainability is a good idea, day-to-day operational issues, staffing challenges, and budget cuts can make it hard to prioritize goals. On the bright side, the most successful sustainability initiatives not only lower costs but also improve revenue and enhance margins.
To help tech leaders kick-start their sustainability planning, Forrester distilled hundreds of conversations with CIOs, enterprise architects, and teams, to identify five strategic areas of opportunity and key actions that can be taken to improve their sustainability maturity.
Set goals and add environmental metrics to your strategic plans and budgets.
Implement tools for environmental sustainability measurement and reporting.
Integrate sustainability outcomes into your transformation initiatives.
Evaluate the role of emerging technology in achieving your sustainability goals.
Seize innovation and partnering opportunities to enhance sustainability.
Implementation Basics
Abhijit Sunil, a Forrester senior analyst, says the initiative that repeatedly came up in all conversations, across all regions, was the challenge of implementing the environmental monitoring tools and solutions required for carbon accounting. “In our research we found that the majority of organizations at this time are in a maturity level where they are automating their carbon accounting and trying to create workflows that will enable data collection from across the organization,” he says.
Sunil notes that the need for strong, reliable environmental monitoring tools is reflected in the arrival of solutions from an array of providers, including software specialists, product firms, and even consulting organizations. “We compared some of them in our report on environmental monitoring software tools,” he says.
Environmental technology tools are a prime medium for a wide range of enterprises, Sunil says. “The technology leader has a big role to play in understanding how these tools differ from each other and how they can be plugged into existing systems within an organization,” he states. “For example, how these tools can plug into ERP systems or HR management systems, and how some of these tools may be able to provide insights into data center management and cloud optimization as well.”
Getting Started With Sustainability
Embarking on a new sustainability journey requires a different approach from bringing an IT leader into a strategy that’s already at an advanced maturity level. “Our report emphasized how the tech leader can start playing a role or optimize their role in sustainability,” Sunil says.
The best way to start a sustainability mission is by understanding the contribution of IT to the overall sustainability or carbon footprint of the organization, Sunil says. The next step, he notes, is to identify the most feasible opportunities within the enterprise to make the biggest impact on sustainability.
Leadership Is Critical for Successful Sustainability
Top-down leadership buy-in is essential for a successful sustainability initiative, both within the overall organization as well as the IT stack. “The best way to counter opposition is to have a clear understanding of the ROI of investing into various sustainability levers,” Sunil says.
The report advises IT leaders to challenge their innovation teams to eliminate scope-1 emissions. “As your organization explores new materials and manufacturing processes, examine the data to find opportunities to collaborate with other ecosystem partners,” the report suggests. “Ask your existing innovation facilitators to run dedicated campaigns to collect ideas to improve your environmental sustainability and consider sharing the findings with your strategic partners and long-term suppliers.”
Sunil notes that an organization might monitor, for example, exactly how much money data center energy optimization is conserving along with carbon footprint savings. “This is also how initiatives can be funded — sustainability is often synonymous with optimization and vice versa,” he says. “In many cases, green energy may be cheaper than conventional energy.”
Sunil adds that working directly with vendors and infrastructure suppliers can be extremely helpful for technology leaders planning a sustainability agenda. As the report notes: “Together, you can move faster, identify opportunities, and leverage their ecosystem of partners to help with projects, such as data center and network optimization, automation, and software platforms.”
Well, it seems brands might be onto you and one of the reasons you really find yourself going for “softer colours.”
Research from Psychology and Marketing published in June suggested that colours, and their saturation (a colour’s purity and intensity), influence how eco-friendly we think a product is.
So, the less saturated – more muted – an object is, the more we unconsciously think that it’s more eco-friendly, even if it’s not.
After conducting five experimental studies, researchers suggest consumers link low colour saturation with a product which has a “gentler” impact on the environment.
They explained: “This perception of eco-friendliness, in turn, increases their trust in the product maker’s greenness.”
While the research doesn’t mention greenwashing, this explanation of how consumers perceive colour lends itself to that particular form of advertising.
Greenwashing is a practice where brands and corporations seem to advocate for good environmental policies without putting them in place.
A study from the EU in 2021 found greenwashing is particularly prevalent in online marketing, with many websites making exaggerated, false claims to reel in the eco-conscious among us.
As the research pointed out: “The results reveal that, by fostering perceptions of eco-friendliness and green trust, such colours favourably influence consumers’ behavioural intentions.”
As in, you’re more likely to buy it – and pay a “premium price” for it.
In fact, this does just happen with material possessions. Bright colours in any products are linked to other higher characteristics, like a higher amount of calories and a sharper taste in food, or a larger size or magnitude, in other objects.
Being green is in – even if only wearing it in subtle shades.
“It’s become a status [to be eco-friendly]. Being an environmentally conscious consumer adds to people’s sense of self,” Sigal Segev, associate professor of advertising at Florida international University told the BBC.
The expert said being green (or trying to be) helps alleviate shopping guilt in consumers, explaining: “The guilt is kicking in. People are thinking, ‘this is the least I can do, not only for myself, but also for future generations.’”
Sustainability consultant and author of the Ethical Business Book, Sarah Duncan, told BBC Future that being green helps our conscience.
“These claims make us feel better about our overconsumption, our consumerism. But the reality is that we should all be buying less,” she explained. So, rather than shopping for the latest muted summer palette this summer, perhaps we should all try to stick to the second-hand shops instead?
A one-megawatt solar installation in western Texas. Image: Jonathan Cutrer/Flickr
By Tina Casey from Triple Pundit • Reposted: July 5, 2023
Fossil energy stakeholders continue to insist on the need for new gas power plants, but evidence is emerging that wind and solar power can buffer the electricity grid from heat waves and other extreme weather events. That provides more support for corporations to continue lobbying for more clean energy, both as a means of climate action and a simple bottom-line matter of keeping the lights on.
Clean energy comes through in Texas
Both wind and solar power were lauded as workhorses during an extended heat wave that descended on Texas last month.
“Experts credit the state’s diversity of energy sources for keeping the lights on. The significant increase in solar power generation in recent years has helped meet the growing demand for electricity in Texas, which operates its grid largely independently of the rest of the country,” the Texas Tribune reported on June 28.
“The Texas power grid comfortably met record demand during this week’s heat wave with abundant power supply from wind and solar plants, data from the grid operator showed,” Reuters reported on June 30, noting that the Texas grid added more than 6,300 megawatts of wind and solar along with more than 1,300 megawatts of grid-stabilizing energy storage, just in the past year.
Wind speeds tend to slow during heat waves, and solar panels function less efficiently in hot weather. However, the additional clean energy and storage capacity helped to counterbalance heat-related slowdowns in output.
Grids are vulnerable to extreme weather
The growth of clean energy in Texas made a marked difference in grid stability compared to years past. In February of 2021, for example, a severe winter storm propelled a lethal, widespread blackout In the state. At the time, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott quickly blamed the failure on wind turbines and solar panels. However, a body of follow-up reports identified the chief culprit as frozen conditions among the state’s large roster of unweatherized gas power plants.
The problem was exacerbated when the supply of gas to power plants was disrupted by inadvertent electricity cut-offs when utilities tried to prevent further grid damage.
“At one point during February’s storm, more than half of the state’s natural gas supply was shut down due to power outages, frozen equipment and weather conditions,” the Texas Tribune reported last year.
Though wind and solar did lose some capacity in the storm of 2021, as did all other forms of power generation, that was far outweighed by gas outages. On average, gas power plants supply 42 percent of the state’s electricity, meaning that any system-wide impact on the gas sector will have an outsized effect on the grid.
The problems in Texas were further amplified by its unique grid, which lacks the interconnections that could have enabled it to call upon resources in other states.
Texas leads on clean energy
The case for clean energy was difficult at the beginning of the 21st century when the technology was relatively new and costs were high compared to conventional resources.
Nevertheless, the Texas wind industry was already racing to lead the nation. It was fueled by a major new transmission system that began operating in 2013, as part of the state’s Competitive Renewable Energy Zones (CREZ) initiative. The new CREZ system brought wind power from the sparsely populated western part of the state to high-demand regions in the east.
The new transmission system did not just pop up out of nowhere. It was a joint venture between two corporate giants, comprised of a subsidiary of the Ohio-based energy firm American Electric Power and MidAmerican Energy Holdings, a subsidiary of the Nebraska-based firm Berkshire Hathaway.
New transmission lines are notoriously difficult to build, but the CREZ system progressed relatively quickly after first proposed in 2005. In a 2020 study of the project, Rice University attributed its success to the “influence of wind power inventors and developers on specific legislators and the governor.”
Rice also cited the state’s strong history in energy entrepreneurship, as well as public support for clean energy and lobbying by environmental groups. Similar factors have also propelled growth in the state’s solar industry. Texas is now second only to California in solar capacity.
Texas businesses support clean energy
The power of corporate energy buyers has been on full display across the U.S. since 2015 when business leaders organized in support of former President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan during the runup to the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change.
The Clean Power Plan never took effect, and former President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement. But U.S. corporations have continued to push the renewable envelope by leveraging their own buying power — including in Texas.
Still, despite growth of wind and solar in Texas, the state’s legislature has turned against clean energy in recent years. A new law intended to thwart ESG (environmental, social and governance) investing took effect in 2021, for example. But hundreds of Texas businesses continue to lobby in support of clean energy.
One group, the Texas Energy Buyers Alliance (TEBA), counts almost 400 companies on its rolls, including some of the largest employers and electricity users in the state. When state lawmakers introduced two burdensome new bills earlier this year, TEBA lobbied against them.
“The Legislature should strengthen our open energy market without discriminating against vital clean energy resources — and without picking winners and losers among the range of technologies Texas needs to power its future,” TEBA advised in a sponsored article posted on the Texas Tribune website.
Climate change affects everyone but in vastly unequal ways. To address this and drive real, sustainable change, businesses must ensure their sustainability strategies do not exacerbate existing inequalities even further. By Isabel Shopley from Sustainable Brands * Reposted: July 5, 2023
When it comes to genuine sustainable development, businesses still have a blind spot. Collectively, we’re failing to address the systemic risk posed by mounting levels of inequality. This is a humanitarian tragedy and a barrier to long-term, meaningful sustainable change.
Addressing inequality — a business imperative
According to calculations by Credit Suisse, 54 percent of the $127.5 trillion in new wealth created between 2012 and 2022 went to the world’s richest 1 percent. And only 0.7 percent went to the four billion people who make up half the global population, predominantly in the Global South.
As the reality and challenge grows starker and harder to ignore, businesses are waking up to the urgent and systemic risk of inequality. It erodes trust in our political and economic system, unravels the social fabric, fuels civil and political unrest and constrains economic growth. In May, a group of more than 30 major corporations convened under the Business Commission to Tackle Inequality (BCTI) to launch a flagship report asserting that growing inequality is bad for business. The report highlights how rising inequality contributes to:
an increasingly volatile business operating environment;
supply chain insecurity;
the erosion of productivity and innovation;
regulatory and compliance risks; and
reputation risk.
It’s no surprise, then, that corporate performance on inequality-related matters is increasingly recognised as an investor priority because it creates ‘systemic risk’ to their entire portfolio. In response to this, a new framework is being developed for financial disclosures for social and inequality-related risks. The aim is to develop a disclosure framework similar to the TCFD and TNFD frameworks for climate and nature.
Inequality and climate change: 2 sides of the same coin
Aside from the business and economic cost and the vast humanitarian consequences, inequality also undermines the world’s ability to address existential global threats such as climate change. As wealthy countries outsource industries and labor to developing nations, emissions are driven up — as these nations have usually not had their industries regulated through global climate policies or modernised to become more sustainable. Additionally, poverty in developing nations often forces communities to put more pressure on the environment — which can lead to unsustainable agricultural practices, deforestation and overexploitation of natural resources.
So, inequality worsens climate change — which simultaneously fuels inequality. For example, poorer countries lack the resources to recover from extreme weather events brought on by climate change. Similarly, access to resources such as clean water, food and adequate housing is reduced as the climate worsens — further exacerbating insecurity and inequality.
Sustainable solutions must incorporate all voices
It’s clear that not everyone will feel the impacts of climate change equally. Many communities will lose more than others, compounding deep-rooted societal and systemic inequalities. Despite this, it’s these very people who will feel the effects of climate change most acutely that are often left out of the conversation when it comes to business solutions. This dangerous discrepancy can limit perspectives on the climate issue and the success and relevance of proposed solutions. It’s crucial we address the needs of those worst affected by climate change and incorporate their voices and knowledge into decision-making.
Doing so will help futureproof organisational strategies, too. To date, businesses haven’t been particularly proactive at including the perspectives of those groups most likely to be negatively impacted by climate change into their conversations and strategies to address it. But they should be. Consideration of their challenges and insights is not only fair — it can also be the difference between success and failure when it comes to setting short- and long-term sustainability priorities.
Rethinking business impact and rightsholders
The introduction of double materiality is set to change this and is driving a monumental shift in the way businesses consider impacts and rightsholders. Double materiality requires organisations to engage with two types of stakeholder: users of information and affected stakeholders, or ‘rightsholders,’ who are or could be affected by the organisation’s activities. To support this shift, companies must assess the significance of an impact according to its severity and likelihood. This methodology draws on established human rights impact-assessment methodologies with an emphasis on the rightsholder.
This is good news from an inequality perspective. By considering the views of rightsholders, a company is much more likely to take on board the opinions of those who face greater levels of inequality.
The way forward
Climate change affects everyone but in vastly unequal ways. To address this and drive real, sustainable change, businesses must ensure their sustainability strategies do not exacerbate existing inequalities even further. This won’t happen overnight; but it starts with a greater understanding of who your rightsholders and affected stakeholders are and how your business’ contribution towards climate change could impact them.
Double materiality and the BCTI’s new framework for financial disclosures on social and inequality-related risks can help with this. Ultimately, both reflect a broader, positive shift towards addressing and disclosing business impacts on sustainability-related issues — not just the impact of those issues on the business. This holistic approach to impact is key to reducing inequalities and creating meaningful sustainable change.
Marketing has a pivotal role to play in driving the significant change required to shift from a linear to a circular economy. By Marie Hattar via Fast Company • Reposted: June 30, 2023
Corporate social responsibility has long been viewed as a unifying organizational principle. These initiatives have successfully helped companies improve their impact on society, local communities, and the environment. However, the magnitude of climate-related problems is pushing environmental concerns to the forefront, with the principles of a circular economy gaining visibility as we understand the need to change how we produce and consume products.
The circular economy is a broad-reaching product lifecycle approach in the CSR space that reflects systemic change rather than a series of initiatives to achieve social, economic, and environmental sustainability. This means creating products that are more durable, reusable, repairable, and recyclable so they remain in circulation as long as possible. In addition, it requires a cultural shift to end the practice of make, buy, and throw away.
CIRCULAR ECONOMY 101
Driven by design, the circular economy involves eliminating waste and pollution, keeping products and materials circulating, and regenerating natural systems. This means designing for long-lasting use, then extending the product life by sharing, leasing, reusing, repairing, and refurbishing, ultimately ending with product and component recycling. This represents a shift in how we produce and consume goods and services.
And if the circular economy gains more traction, it can help slow the pace of rising temperatures. Global adoption remains slow, with less than 9% of economic systems embracing circularity. In addition to the sustainability benefits, there are other business advantages, including creating new revenue streams, cost savings, and reputational gains. By moving to a circular model, organizations can build a more sustainable and profitable entity, helping create a more resilient and responsible future.
Marketing plays a pivotal role in helping push circular economy approaches forward. Brands should champion the principles of less raw material and waste, resulting in fewer emissions. This can help fundamentally change how to promote and position products, and the focus should be on demonstrating evidence of living the values.
So, how can marketing teams help broaden the adoption of the circular economy? Below are some fundamentals to focus on.
PRODUCT REUSE
Patagonia is a prime example of a consumer brand that has long advocated for a more sustainable approach, as reflected by its Worn Wear initiative launched in 2013. The program aims to reduce the environmental impact of Patagonia’s products and ensure that its gear and clothing remain in circulation as long as possible by offering repairs by expert technicians. In addition, it has long demonstrated its commitment to recycling materials in its product range.
Every company, irrespective of industry or target persona, can follow Patagonia’s lead and adopt key principles of the circular economy. By promoting circular attributes of products, brands can differentiate and appeal to customers searching for more sustainable options.
For example, the Keysight Trade-In Program promotes and rewards technology refreshes for customers by offering compelling credits. This trade-in initiative helps keep electronic waste out of landfills, reduces the need for new products, and reuses existing equipment. This program has been highly successful, with 80% of the returned products resold and the remaining 20% recycled. The program is a vital part of our commitment to sustainability, repurposing, and reuse.
TRANSPARENCY = TRUST
Marketing teams should be clear on exactly how their products support the circular economy. Building trust with your audience requires disclosing critical information, including the product’s carbon footprint, reusability, and recyclability. Through campaigns, advertisements, and branding, marketing can show the entire life cycle, highlighting aspects such as designing for circularity, material sourcing, production, usage, and end-of-life management.
SHARING AND SERVICE
The sharing economy is another crucial piece of circularity, as it promotes allocating resources with multiple groups rather than a single entity helping maximize the usage. It can also uncover new revenue streams such as ride-sharing, coworking, peer-to-peer lending, and cloud solutions.
DIGITAL ACCELERATOR
Digital technologies like big data, IoT, and AI can help marketers optimize the circularity of products and materials and create more personalized and efficient experiences. At Keysight, our digital twin technologies allow organizations to evaluate new product designs. The virtual model ensures the solution is fit for purpose before building anything, supporting a more sustainable and efficient way to design and build products.
COST BENEFITS
There are many financial benefits from using recycled materials, minimizing waste, and extending the life of products. In addition, with governments increasingly introducing environmental regulations, organizations can ensure compliance by adopting circularity.
THE FUTURE IS CIRCULAR
Marketing has a pivotal role to play in driving the significant change required to shift from a linear to a circular economy. From demand creation for sustainable products and services to promoting the shift towards a more circular way of doing business, I believe CMOs must champion the cause. As teams embrace circularity, it’s vital to remember that the long-term benefits for the organization and the world far outweigh any short-term difficulty experienced.
And for anyone thinking about ignoring the circular economy, I will remind you of the wise words of Robert Swan: “The greatest threat to our planet is the belief that someone else will save it.”
Marie Hattar is CMO at Keysight Technologies, responsible for brand and global marketing efforts.
Visitors wait to board shuttles at the Temple of Sinawava during Memorial Day Weekend 2022, Zion National Park, Utah, date unspecified | Photo courtesy National Park Service / Jonathan Shafer, St. George News
By Emily Wakild, Cecil D. Andrus Endowed Professor for the Environment and Public Lands, Boise State University via The Conversation • Reposted: June 28, 2023
Outdoor recreation is on track for another record-setting year. In 2022, U.S. national parks logged more than 300 million visits – and that means a lot more people on roads and trails.
For all of their popularity, national parks are just one subset of U.S. public lands. Across the nation, the federal government owns more than 640 million acres (2.6 million square kilometers) of land. Depending on each site’s mission, its uses may include logging, livestock grazing, mining, oil and gas production, wildlife habitat or recreation – often, several of these at once. In contrast, national parks exist solely to protect some of the most important places for public enjoyment.
In my work as a historian and researcher, I’ve explored the history of public land management and the role of national parks in shaping landscapes across the Americas. Many public lands are prime recreational territory and are also becoming increasingly crowded. Finding solutions requires visitors, gateway communities, state agencies and the outdoor industry to collaborate. U.S. public lands are managed for many different purposes by an alphabet soup of federal agencies.
Alternatives to national parks
The U.S. government is our nation’s largest land manager by far. Federal property makes up 28% of surface land area across the 50 states. In Western states like Nevada, the federal footprint can be as large as 80% of the land. That’s largely because much of this land is arid, and lack of water makes farming difficult. Other areas that are mountainous or forested were not initially viewed as valuable when they came under U.S. ownership – but values have changed.
Public lands are more diverse than national parks. Some are scenic; others are just open space. They include all kinds of ecosystems, from forests to grasslands, coastlines, red rock canyons, deserts and ranges covered with sagebrush. They also include battlefields, rivers, trails and monuments. Many are remote, but others are near or within major metropolitan areas.
Many people who love hiking, fishing, backpacking or other outdoor activities know that national parks are crowded, and they often seek other places to enjoy nature, including public lands. That trend intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic, when lockdowns and social distancing protocols motivated people to get outside wherever they could.
The rise of remote work has also fueled a population shift toward smaller Western towns with access to open space and good internet access for videoconferencing. Popular remote work bases like Durango, Colorado, and Bend, Oregon, have become known as “Zoom towns” – a fresh take on the old boomtowns that brought people west in the 19th century.
With these new populations, gateway communities close to popular public lands face critical decisions. Outdoor recreation is a powerful economic engine: In 2021, it contributed an estimated US$454 billion to the nation’s economy – more than auto manufacturing and air transport combined.
But embracing recreational tourism can lead local communities into the amenity trap – the paradox of loving a place to death. Recreation economies that fail to manage growth, or that neglect investments in areas like housing and infrastructure, risk compromising the sense of place that draws visitors. But planning can proactively shape growth to maintain community character and quality of life.
Broadening recreation
People use public lands for many activities beyond a quiet hike in the woods. For instance, the Phoenix District of the federal Bureau of Land Management operates more than 3 million acres across central Arizona for at least 14 different recreational uses, including hiking, fishing, boating, target shooting, rock collecting and riding off-road vehicles.
Not all of these activities are compatible, and many have not traditionally been rigorously managed. For example, target shooters sometimes bring objects like old appliances or furniture to use as improvised targets, then leave behind an unsightly mess. In response, the Phoenix District has designated recreational shooting sites where it provides targets and warns against shooting at objects containing glass or hazardous materials, as well as cactuses.
Shooting at targets that contain glass or hazardous materials can contaminate nearby land. BLM
Skiing also can pose crowding challenges. Many downhill skiing facilities in the West operate on public land with permits from the managing agency – typically, the U.S. Forest Service.
One example, Bogus Basin Mountain Recreation Area is a nonprofit ski slope 16 miles from Boise, Idaho. Demand surges on winter weekends with fresh powder, creating long lift lines and crowded slopes.
The mountain is open for 12 hours a day, and Bogus Basin uses creative pricing structures for lift tickets to spread crowds out. For example, it draws younger skiers with discounted night skiing and retired skiers during the week. As a result, the parking lot only filled up once in the 2022-2023 season.
Local governments can help find ways to balance access with creative crowd management. In Seattle, King County launched Trailhead Direct to provide transit-to-trails services from Seattle to the Cascade Mountains. This approach expands access to the outdoors for city residents and reduces traffic on busy Interstate 90 and crowding in trailhead parking lots.
Other towns have partnered with federal land agencies to maintain trail systems, like the Ridge to Rivers network outside Boise and the River Reach trails near Farmington, New Mexico. This helps the towns provide better nearby outdoor opportunities for residents and attract new businesses whose employees value quality of life. Creating corridors from the “backyard to the backcountry,” as the Bureau of Land Management puts it, can help create vibrant communities.
A less-extractive view of public lands
For many years, Western communities have viewed public lands as places to mine, log and graze sheep and cattle. Tensions between states and the federal government over federal land policy often reflect state resentment over decisions made in Washington, D.C. about local resources.
Now, land managers are seeing a pivot. While federal control will never be welcome in some areas, Western communities increasingly view federal lands as amenities and anchors for immense opportunities, including recreation and economic growth. For example, Idaho is investing $100 million for maintenance and expanded access on state lands, mirroring federal efforts.
As environmental law scholar Robert Keiter has pointed out, the U.S. has a lot of laws governing activities like logging, mining and energy development on public lands, but there’s little legal guidance for recreation. Instead, agencies, courts and presidents are developing what Keiter calls “a common law of outdoor recreation,” bit by bit. By addressing crowding and the environmental impacts of recreation, I believe local communities can help the U.S. move toward better stewardship of our nation’s awe-inspiring public lands.
Now’s the time to take all that effort and integrate it into fun engagement opportunities for both your workforce and your brand’s biggest fans. Here are our seven favorite ideas for doing just that. From Barkley via Sustainablebrands.com • Reposted: June 28, 2023
Say you just received your B Corp certification or published your annual sustainability report — congrats! So much work; such important initiatives, goals and commitments — all of which deserve both applause and audience.
But brace yourself: Your work’s not done — we’re trying to change the world, after all — but the next steps don’t have to be so laborious. Now’s the time to take all that effort and integrate it into fun engagement opportunities for both your workforce and your brand’s biggest fans.
Here are our seven favorite ideas for doing just that, collected through years of promoting and publicizing both our B Corp certification and annual impact reports and those of our clients. Steal wildly; get credit for all you’re doing!
1. Timing is everything.
Pick an intentional launch date for your report that is relevant to your brand. We launched our latest Impact Report on June 1 — coinciding with our annual company-wide volunteer day, Goodworks. We’ve also shared it during an annual creativity festival, where it was received with a theater full of enthusiasm.
Think: What events, occasions or holidays are meaningful to your organization and thematically align with the goals and initiatives you feature in your sustainability report?
2. Win inside to win outside.
Every day, we find new ways to express the importance of operating as a responsible, sustainable, certified B Corporation — but we can’t do it without our employees. That’s why we tap them to star in content we create for presentations, speeches, speaker booths and on social media throughout the year. And we regularly ideate and share tips and tricks to both live and work sustainably: We like to create what we call one-sheeters — a single page of ideas to print on recycled paper (we posted ours in the restrooms!) or display on digital screens — to help employees keep sustainability goals top of mind. Composting at the office increased three-fold with proper signage.
Think: How can you celebrate your wins with your employees to inspire them and share tangible ways they can see themselves in the sustainability work that needs to be done throughout the year? Your people make your progress possible.
3. Lean into your brand’s beloved rituals or icons.
Our company HQ features a retired TWA rocket on the rooftop; so our employees lovingly call themselves ‘rocket people’ — which means yes, astronaut mascots frequently appear at various events throughout the year. This ritual inspired the creative imagery for the reports, social content and print materials we used to announce our B Corp certification to the world. Iconic imagery makes for inspired social sharing from your brand’s true believers.
Think: What rituals, icons or imagery has significant meaning to your employees and brand identity; and how can you use it within both your report (next year) and how you promote it?
4. Bring on the (sustainable) swag.
We think through our impact on our communities through every action we take — from supporting our client’s production needs down to our preferred caterers. And we love opportunities to support local, women-owned and minority-owned businesses. So, when it came time to celebrate our B Corp certification, we sent our employees a box of goodies and Barkley-branded merch to celebrate, sourced from diverse suppliers and fellow B Corp brands: confetti seeds; a reusable tote with the iconic astronaut photo; a copy of our book, The Purpose Advantage; and a bento box for to-go lunches on office days. Thematically on point; extra points for usability.
Think: Can you include your employees on what type of swag they’d be proud to use, wear or celebrate — or even give them a chance to opt out to save waste if they aren’t interested? Then, can you intentionally source these items from diverse, local, minority-owned or B Corp-certified vendors?
5. Share the love and add a hashtag.
At Barkley, our mission is to #addgood to everything we do — a mantra we’ve used so much over the years, we created a hashtag our partners know to use any time client work, a volunteer effort, shareable ideas and especially our sustainability work is mentioned on social media. One of our favorite ways #addgood comes to life? A content series we call “People of Barkley” — a showcase of the diverse perspectives and creative talent who animate our brand. Encourage your employees to use it when speaking about their contributions, and pulling content to include in next year’s report will be easier, too.
Think: How can you encourage your employees to share and promote the good work your brand is doing in a way that feels authentic to both them and your brand?
6. Turn metrics into gratitude + awareness opportunities.
Every year, we feature in our report external partners, clients, vendors, suppliers and other stakeholders that help us achieve our sustainability goals — hopefully, you do, too! We also reach out to these stakeholders post-launch to personally thank them for helping us reach our goals and sharing future plans and expectations for our ongoing partnerships.
Think: How can you mine your ESG metrics and trace them back to individuals and organizations critical to your progress? Then, what type of personalized gesture can you create to share your gratitude and encourage continued collaboration?
7. Start now to build next year’s report.
Once our report is out in the world, we debrief to level-set and re-align on the work ahead. This allows us to analyze what worked, what was hard and where we can improve for next year. A huge discovery for us was realizing that collecting stories, testimonials, case studies, photographs and video year-round makes the following year’s report compilation that much easier — and adds flair and personality to the report itself.
Think: Can you hire or assign an employee resource group to capture and cover events and opportunities that can not only feed next year’s report in terms of stories and content, but can also add value, recognition and encouragement to employees doing this work throughout the year? Are there existing communication channels inside or outside of your organization — like your company’s intranet or LinkedIn — from which you can mine stories for your report year-round?
From employees and external stakeholders to your brand’s biggest fans, the people who believe in your brand are your most valuable resource and a competitive advantage for your business. Intentionally investing in ways to encourage their belief and involvement in your sustainability strategy is key to maximizing momentum toward your goals — and that’s a win-win for everyone.
Sponsored Content / This article is sponsored by Barkley. This article, produced in cooperation with the Sustainable Brands editorial team, has been paid for by one of Sustainable Brands sponsors.
The team at North Carolina-based 374Water show off their prized invention. The container behind them may not look like much, but it can eliminate PFAS from up to 1 million gallons of wastewater per day. Image: 374Water
By Phil Covington from Triple Pundit • Reposted: June 26, 2023
PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are a group of manufactured chemicals that have been produced since the 1940s. While they have myriad useful properties and manifest in a range of products from nonstick surfaces to personal care products, concerns over their use are growing.
PFAS are also known as “forever chemicals,” because they break down very slowly, if at all, in nature. Consequently, they continue to accumulate in greater concentrations in our environment, and by now they’ve even infiltrated our bloodstreams.
TriplePundit recently reported on new innovations aiming to mitigate the proliferation of PFAS by finding safer alternatives to them. But we need to find ways to remove existing PFAS, too.
Though this is notoriously difficult, a North Carolina-based company found a way to eliminate these chemicals, somewhat by accident, in its effort to modernize wastewater treatment. “We got lucky in that we responded to the challenge to re-invent the toilet.” Sunny Viswanathan, VP and head of global sales at 374Water, told TriplePundit.
Meeting that challenge, seeded by a grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focused the team on developing an optimal sanitation system which could be deployed in low-income parts of the world. In that effort, they sought ways to render waste sludges both useful and inert, leading them to consider supercritical water oxidation (SCWO) as a potential solution.
Historically, SCWO was used to destroy persistent environmental damage resulting from chemical warfare, Viswanathan told us. But his team found the technology translated well to wastewater management, while coincidentally dealing with PFAS.
What is supercritical water oxidation?
Water reaches the supercritical stage when both its temperature and pressure are increased to a point where it is no longer a liquid, nor is it a gas. Instead, as Viswanathan described it, “It goes into another ‘phase’ of water.”
Supercritical conditions for water arise at 374 degrees Celsius and a pressure of 218 atmospheres, or over 3,200 PSI (pounds-force per square inch). Once supercritical, water develops some interesting properties which are useful for processing organic waste.
“Water as a liquid can dissolve salts, but it can’t dissolve organic matter,” Viswanathan explained. He used the example of adding pepper to water, which of course won’t dissolve. Why that’s the case has to do with the shape of the water molecule and consequent polarity of water, Viswanathan explained.
A water molecule has a V-shaped structure that includes a single oxygen atom with two hydrogen atoms attached. This structure affords it a positive and negative charge at an atomic level. Because of this, ionic salts can dissolve but, with very few exceptions, most organic matter — like, in this example, pepper — will be unaffected, Viswanathan explained. But the inverse is true under supercritical conditions.
“When you go supercritical, the shape of the water molecule literally changes — which means it loses its polarity and becomes a very good solvent of organic substances and a bad solvent of salts,” Viswanathan said. “Salts will come out of the solution, but now your pepper will disappear. Your poop will disappear.”
And here is the important point. Because PFAS substances are organic, “Your PFAS will disappear,” he said.
In essence, under supercritical conditions, all the organic matter in wastewater — including PFAS — becomes completely dissociated. When air is added to the mix, an exothermic oxidation reaction takes place, completing the process.
“By introducing air, which has 21 percent oxygen, it will go after the carbon and make CO2 [carbon dioxide]. Once it removes carbon from the material, it becomes inorganic and will form salts and water — and energy, as it is an exothermic process,” Viswanathan said.
The last point is important. An exothermic reaction is one which produces heat. 374Water’s AirSCWO system uses the heat produced by the exothermic reaction to perpetuate the process. So long as you continue to put waste sludge in, “the waste is the fuel,” Viswanathan said.
374Water’s AirSCWO reactor units are packaged into 40-foot shipping containers that the company says can neutralize PFAS and other water contaminants in seconds. (Image: 374Water)
Putting the technology in the field to eliminate PFAS
With this simplified and abstract explanation of the science in mind, what does 374Water’s system look like in the field?
The company’s AirSCWO reactor units are packaged into 40-foot shipping containers (see above). The smallest reactor is a single container, while larger configurations would combine two or more. The company has plans for building-based systems, too.
Household or industrial wastewater comes into the container through a pipe at one end, and inside it, the contents of the pipe are pressurized and heated. Some external energy source is needed initially to start the system.
Wastewater sludge coming into the reactor is typically 80 percent water, and it’s the existing water content of the sludge which goes supercritical. Once that happens, all organic matter within gets dissociated and oxidized, which happens quite rapidly. “It takes four to 40 seconds to go from something that is completely toxic to something that is completely benign, clean and useful,” Viswathanan said.
Indeed, it’s useful in various ways. The system’s output is distilled water and useful minerals such as phosphorus which can be processed into fertilizer. Meanwhile, surplus energy from the exothermic reaction has the potential to be captured for electricity generation.
As for the PFAS, these are broken down into carbon, fluorine, hydrogen, oxygen and sulfur. As Viswathanan put it, “Just by exposing PFAS to supercritical conditions, you have actually destroyed them.”
What’s next for this high-potential PFAS solution?
It’s taken 10 years for 374Water to go from concept to commercialization. The company, now traded on the NASDAQ stock exchange, will see the first of its commercial units go into operation in Orange County, California, next month.
Expansion from there will be carefully undertaken, as 374Water plans to start at a scale that is manageable. But the addressable market is substantial.
Each 40-foot reactor can process up to 1 million gallons of wastewater per day. Of the roughly 17,000 wastewater facilities treating household, commercial and some industrial wastewater in the U.S., only 9,000 of these are in the 1-million-gallon range. In theory, in combination with the larger reactors the company has planned, it would have the capacity to service all of these facilities.
That said, scalability relies to a large extent on the right incentives. The state of Maine offers one such example.
Because of PFAS, the state has banned the application of wastewater sludge on the land, an increasingly common practice on U.S. farms. That shift means water treatment plants have to spend up to $200 per ton to send their wet sludge out of state. Since 374Water’s method eliminates PFAS and produces no waste sludge, the system would provide a huge cost avoidance opportunity under these circumstances. Consequently, municipal sanitation providers could see payback on a reactor in as few as three years, Viswathanan said.
As a final point, he emphasized the long-term opportunity this way. “The technologies we are relying on now for waste treatment are nearly 100-year-old, antiquated technologies. We now have a system that is capable of not only treating the waste, but also destroying the recalcitrant waste and taking it out of the ecosystem.”
Modern third-party risk management requires deep, near-constant monitoring by Matthew Debbag from Corporate Compliance Insights • Reposted: June 22, 2023
Ethical sourcing and due diligence have become crucial components of third-party risk management. But as Creditsafe’s Matthew Debbage explains, many companies still aren’t taking the threat seriously enough.
Despite the increasing focus on compliance and risk management,a recent survey by Creditsafe found that nearly half (42%) of companies would still work with a supplier even if they have been sanctioned or involved in corruption, bribery, fraud, money laundering or forced labor. And it’s not as if this is simply a function of ignorance of the truth: 83% of companies run compliance checks on international suppliers at least once a quarter, indicating that they are either not taking the results seriously or may be ignoring the outcomes.
We expected the respondents in our study to show a stronger commitment to ethical sourcing, but what we discovered was a contradiction between companies’ publicly espoused values and their actions.
This contradiction highlights a significant issue in global supply chain management, and it must change if brands want to restore customer confidence and prevent costly mistakes like lawsuits or fines.
Answering the call for ethical sourcing
Ignoring ethical sourcing and supplier due diligence within your business and with your international suppliers can have severe consequences. A brand’s reputation can be severely damaged, with negative publicity or plummeting stock prices and could be subject to lawsuits, compliance violations and regulatory fines.
There are a number of laws in place to safeguard the U.S. market from unethical businesses. The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act bans imports from China’s Xinjiang region unless companies can prove their goods were not produced using forced labor or child labor. More legislation in this area is possible, as a bipartisan measure, the Slave-Free Business Certification Bill, would require certain large companies to carry out audits on their supply chains to ensure they are free of slave labor.
Beyond compliance violations, another huge risk is the financial and reputational impact. Industry giants like H&M and Nike have encountered consumer boycotts due to their association with suppliers engaging in forced labor.
On the other hand, a prime example of how being a purpose-driven, sustainable company can boost revenue growth and profitability is Patagonia. Regarded as one of the world’s most responsible companies, Patagonia monitors all of its processes, including every step of the manufacturing process, with the goal of minimizing its environmental and social impact. The clothing brand is also a certified B Corporation, having met or exceeded stringent criteria consistently and earning an “outstanding” score in each of the past five years.
Three ways to improve third-party risk management
Here are three ways compliance professionals can enhance third party risk management:
Screening for compliance: By leveraging real-time sanctions databases, global enforcement lists, adverse media coverage and profiles of politically exposed persons (PEPs) and state-owned companies, organizations can proactively identify potential red flags and compliance risks. An automated approach can streamline the screening process and optimizes decision making of potential supplier partnerships.
Mitigating operational disruptions: Timely identification of red flags and potential risks allows organizations to proactively develop contingency plans, ensuring they can swiftly address disruptions, such as factory shutdowns, by swiftly reallocating production orders to alternative suppliers.
Enhancing financial stability: One key aspect of third-party risk management is assessing the financial stability of international suppliers. Such insights are vital, as disruptions in the supplier’s operations, whether due to financial difficulties, political unrest, worker disputes or unforeseen events like pandemics, can severely impact a brand’s ability to fulfill production orders on time.
Matthew Debbage is the CEO of the Americas and Asia for Creditsafe. As a longtime veteran of Creditsafe, he has held various leadership roles including COO of Creditsafe Group and CEO of the Americas and Asia since 2012. Over the past 10 years, he led the expansion of the business in the United States, where he has built a high-performing team, driven impressive revenue growth and worked with thousands of American businesses across various industries.
91% of parents surveyed are concerned about climate change — a majority say the crisis has even impacted their perspective on having more children. From Sustainable Brands • Reposted: June 21, 2023
HP revealed new global research by Morning Consult that shows how many parents are working to act on climate change — from everyday decisions to long-term family planning.
The study — conducted in May 2023 among just over 5,000 parents in India, Mexico, Singapore, the United Kingdom and United States — found that 91 percent of parents are concerned about the climate crisis, leading to changes that are reshaping their lives and purchasing habits. More than half (53 percent) say it has impacted their perspective on having more children; and 43 percent say they have reconsidered working for a companybased on its commitment to environmental and social issues.
The research also found many parents favor companies that are taking action to address climate change. Nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of parents surveyed say they prefer products that are sustainably sourced and 60 percent say sustainable company practices play a large part in their purchasing habits. That is despite finding that the vast majority of parents (84 percent) acknowledge the rising cost of living; and more than half (57 percent) believe engaging in environmentally friendly practices takes up a lot of time.
“Families, like all our customers, rely on HP to connect them to the things that matter most — be it work, entertainment or loved ones,” said Michele Malejki, Global Head of Social Impact. “It’s one of the reasons parents are top of mind for us. And like every generation before them, today’s parents have their own unique pressures — especially the climate crisis. It’s why we’re going beyond our business impact to make our business better for people and the planet.”
While parents are taking personal action, most also believe key players in the corporate world must act, too. Most parents (51 percent) believe that companies have “a lot” of responsibility in holding themselves accountable on climate action, as opposed to customers (36 percent).
The findings come as HP releases its 22nd annual Sustainable Impact report, which details the company’s progress toward comprehensive and bold environmental and social goals. HP has:
Reduced its absolute carbon footprint by 18 percent since 2019. This brings the company closer to its goal to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2040 – end to end.
Reduced single-use plastic packaging by 55 percent compared to 2018.
Counteracted deforestation for 32 percent of all paper used in HP products and services toward goal of 100 percent.
Accelerated digital equity for more than 21 million people on path to 150 million by 2030.
Committed to building a pipeline of diverse talent, with 46 percent of US new hires last year from racial or ethnic minorities.
HP aspires to be the most sustainable and just technology company. In 2021, the company set aggressive Sustainable Impact goals in three areas where the company believes it can make the most difference — Climate Action, Human Rights and Digital Equity. The 2022 report details progress toward all three focus areas — including creating a net-zero carbon value chain, giving back more to forests than it takes, creating a more circular economy, building a culture of equality and empowerment, and accelerating digital equity around the world to enable traditionally excluded communities to thrive in a digital economy.
“Our research correlates to what we see in our business: We are keeping customers, winning new sales and attracting talent because of our Sustainable Impact initiatives and sustainable products,” said James McCall, Chief Sustainability Officer. “If we are serious about changing the trajectory of the climate crisis, industry must go beyond — changing the mindset of ‘do no harm’ to ‘do more good.’”
An orange hue tints New York City on June 7 as smoke from more than 100 wildfires across Quebec, Canada, filters south. Wildfire seasons are starting earlier, lasting longer and causing more damage due to climate change, scientists say. (Image: Metropolitan Transportation Authority/Flickr)
By Mary Riddle from Triple Pundit • Reposted: June 21, 2023
The annual Non-Disclosure Campaign engages investors to directly request climate disclosures from top companies responsible for high levels of greenhouse gas emissions.
Organized by the nonprofit CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project), this year’s campaign includes nearly 300 global financial institutions with almost $29 trillion in assets under management. They’re calling for disclosure from over 1,600 high-impact companies — including Saudi Aramco, ExxonMobil, Tesla, Chevron, Caterpillar and Volvo. Together, these companies emit nearly the same amount of greenhouse gases as the United Kingdom, European Union and Canada combined, according to CDP. And they’ve all failed to respond to the nonprofit’s climate disclosure requests.
So, why are climate disclosures important, and how can investors and other stakeholders put the pressure on more companies to disclose? We sat down with Sebastian O’Connor, an associate director at CDP whose team has conducted the Non-Disclosure Campaign since 2017, to learn more.
Why are environmental and climate disclosures important?
“The theory of change behind CDP is quite simply what gets measured gets managed,” O’Connor said. “The end goal of all of our work on climate change is to get emissions down to zero. To get to that point, you need a target that is feasible but ambitious. And to get a target, you need to know where you start.”
While climate disclosures are the most common kind of disclosure reported to CDP, many companies also disclose their water and forest impacts, O’Connor said. “It is more than climate. The whole aspect of nature should be disclosed against — climate and nature are interlinked.”
Corporate climate disclosures encompass business activities that produce emissions, including in the company value chain. Because the world still lacks a global standardized reporting framework, CDP is one of the recognized industry leaders in evaluating climate and nature impacts.
“CDP is the best avenue for standardized, comparable disclosures that can be assessed and graded to see how well a company is doing,” O’Connor said. “We need to know how corporations are impacting the environment in order to create a sustainable economy.”
Why do companies fail to disclose?
Corporations give various reasons for refusing to disclose their climate, water or other nature-related impacts. Some companies cite the time and resources it takes to complete a CDP questionnaire, while others choose to publish their own sustainability reports instead of going through third parties. But self-published reports can be bias, O’Connor said.
“The devil is truly in the details, as companies can decide what to omit and what to publish,” he told us. “Will companies put out anything that goes against the narrative of them always making progress?”
CDP also allows the public to compare companies against others in their peer group in a standardized way that is assessed by an independent third party.
Putting on the pressure
O’Connor thinks chronic non-disclosing companies might not be getting enough pressure from regulators and their investors, but this is changing. “There is clear pressure from regulatory regimes in every part of the world,” he said. “Regulators are paying attention because climate and nature impact the financial security of the world economy. This year, our Non-Disclosure Campaign got 288 signatories to sign on, a quadruple increase from 2017.”
Supporters of this year’s campaign included investors, asset managers, asset owners, insurance companies and other financial institutions. The nonprofit typically sees success because of the direct, simple nature of the requests, O’Connor said.
“CDP acts as an effective bridge between financial institutions and the corporate world,” he said. “We facilitate meetings that often revolve around companies giving their reasons for not disclosing. Then, investors are able to show the benefits to disclosing. When this happens, we have a high rate of previously non-disclosing companies disclosing the following year.”
As governments around the world move toward standardized reporting frameworks, CDP is working to ensure that the regulations are rigorous and ambitious, O’Connor said.
“CDP came into play 20 years ago because regulation did not exist,” he explained. “We formed the foundation of the ESG [environmental, social and governance] universe that we see today.” While regulated disclosures are a welcome change, “we can also influence these regulations to make sure they do not just go to the lowest common denominator,” he said.
“It is about more than just disclosure. We want to help guide companies through every step that leads them to being truly sustainable.”
Left to right: Elana Knopp, Zachary Strauss, Avery Hammond, Jenna Patterson and Rashad Williams. Standing at the mic is Stacy Lentz, co-owner of the Stonewall Inn and CEO of the Stonewall Inn Gives Back Initiative (SIGBI).
Representation is an integral factor to bring about real change — especially as it affects marginalized communities. The power industry, which has historically employed an overly homogenous population of white men, could stand to learn a lot from an influx of diverse people and viewpoints. After all, equity of any type can only be achieved when everyone has a seat at the table and their voices are heeded, not just heard.
With this aim in mind, Edison Energy and its LGBTQ+ employee resource group hosted an all-LGBTQ+ panel at the historic Stonewall Inn last week that focused on how to promote queer representation in the energy sector and, by extension, improve outcomes related to climate change and environmental justice.
Continuing the fight
“The Stonewall is hallowed ground for many of us in the queer community,” said moderator Elana Knopp, the senior content writer at Edison Energy, at the beginning of the event. “It’s literally the epicenter of the gay pride movement.” The historic Greenwich Village gay bar was the site of the Stonewall uprising in 1969 that sparked the gay rights movement in New York City and nationwide.
Renewed efforts by the conservative right to force LGBTQ+, and especially transgender, people back into the closet have heightened the need for this recognition and employee resource groups like Pride in Power. Just as the community’s fight for equal rights faces a massive disinformation campaign from the right wing, so does the fight against climate change, said panelist Brandon Rothrock, an assistant program manager at TRC Companies and board member at OUT for Sustainability, which focuses on mobilizing the LGBTQ+ community for social and environmental action.
The parallel may appear uncanny, as the climate crisis reached emergency proportions in the same timeframe that the Human Rights Campaign declared a state of emergency for LGBTQ+ people in the U.S. It’s the first time in 40 years that the campaign deemed an emergency necessary due to “discriminatory state laws that have created . . . dangerous environments for LGBTQ+ people across the country,” Knopp said.
Marginalized groups face the brunt of climate change
“One thing that’s been well-documented at this point is that the impacts of climate change have been disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, such as
and people of color (POC),” said panelist Rashad Williams, the director of subscriber services at Groundswell, which focuses on expanding equitable access to clean energy. “And when you combine the two, you start seeing a compounding effect of those impacts.”
Those who are both LGBTQ+ and POC have double the unemployment rate of people who are not in those categories, he said. That rate is triple if they are also transgender. Therefore, they’re more likely to live in low-income neighborhoods, which makes them more likely to experience the negative health effects of pollution and climate change, and less likely to have health insurance.
Perhaps the starkest portrayal of these compounding effects is found among the Guna people, an Indigenous group in Panama who are being forced from their island homes on Gardi Sugdub by rising seas. Guna culture is traditionally gender fluid and matrifocal — customs they could lose as they are absorbed and influenced by the majority Catholic and patriarchal social structure in mainland Panama.
Queer-centered action
It’s important to note that the environmental justice movement owes its inception to the BIPOC community, “the same folks that led the Stonewall uprising,” Knopp said. “The environmental justice movement was basically founded on the principle that everyone deserves to breathe clean air and drink clean water and have access to clean neighborhoods.”
Still, until recently the movement had not specifically focused on the queer community, she said.
The queer perspective is needed in the energy sector to ensure the switch to clean energy benefits everyone. Changes to infrastructure and access will only be as equitable as they are safe, said panelist Zachary Strauss, a policy analyst at Atlas Public Policy and the founder and president of Out in Energy, a community of LGBTQ+ people in the energy sector. Charging stations have to be in safe locations to be fully accessible, and electric buses won’t do the queer community any good if LGBTQ+ people have to risk their well-being to ride them.
The energy sector still has a long way to go. Workers in the field report the least confidence in their employer’s recruitment and hiring of members from the LGBTQ+ community compared to other marginalized groups, according to a report commissioned by the National Association of State Energy Officials. Panelists noted a few methods energy companies can utilize to better recruit and retain LGBTQ+ individuals, including mentorships, ERGs like Pride in Power, opportunities to socialize during work hours, inclusive language, and utilizing pronouns that make transgender and non-binary people feel safe as their authentic selves in the workplace.
Ultimately it starts from the top with a need for leadership to speak out and support the community by investing in the workforce, Strauss said. As well as “retention through affirmation” by ensuring people don’t have to hide who they are in the workplace.
Taking a stand when there are no guarantees
The clean energy sector does appear to be more conducive to LGBTQ+ employment, but the industry as a whole continues to struggle with anti-queer prejudice. Last year’s Pride in Energy survey found a 40 percent increase in discrimination over 2021.
While allies can, and must, do their part to support LGBTQ+ voices and action, there is no guarantee that power companies will do what’s needed going forward — especially under the current climate in which corporations that have historically presented themselves as allies are backtracking.
“It’s a little bit trickier making sure that your company takes a stand,” said Avery Hammond, Edison Energy’s senior clean energy analyst. “That’s a decision that’s not left up to most of us — none of us actually.”
This is why it’s more important than ever for allies and LGBTQ+ individuals to speak up, demand better, and reward companies that continue to fight the good fight. True environmental justice depends on it.
Environmental justice is, after all, a matter of civil rights.
By Howie Griffiths from goodmenproject.org • Reposted: June 20, 2023
In an era marked by environmental concerns and a growing focus on social responsibility, individuals hold immense power to drive positive change through their everyday choices. By embracing ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) initiatives, we can help create a more sustainable future.
This article explores the ways in which individuals can make a meaningful impact by adopting eco-conscious purchasing habits, practicing responsible consumption, and supporting socially responsible companies. Through ESG learning and taking conscious actions, we can collectively create a world that prioritizes sustainability and addresses pressing global challenges.
The Power of Eco-Conscious Purchasing
One of the most impactful ways individuals can contribute to a sustainable future is through eco-conscious purchasing. By carefully considering the ethics and environmental impact of the products we buy, we can support companies that prioritize sustainable practices and reduce our ecological footprint. ESG courses play a vital role in helping individuals understand the importance of sustainable consumption and make informed choices.
Firstly, consider the materials and production processes involved in the products you purchase. Opt for goods made from sustainable materials, such as organic cotton or recycled plastics, which minimize the depletion of natural resources and reduce waste.
Secondly, look for products that are ethically sourced and produced. This includes supporting fair trade organizations that ensure workers receive fair wages and operate in safe conditions. By choosing products that prioritize social responsibility, you contribute to the well-being of communities worldwide.
Furthermore, consider the longevity and durability of the products. Investing in high-quality items that last longer reduces the need for frequent replacements and helps combat the issue of excessive consumption.
Practicing Responsible Consumption
Responsible consumption involves adopting mindful habits that minimize waste and prioritize sustainability. ESG learning equips individuals with knowledge of responsible consumption practices and empowers them to make conscious decisions.
One key aspect of responsible consumption is reducing single-use items. Start by reducing single-use items in your daily life. Replace disposable products with reusable alternatives, such as plastic cutlery and water bottles. By doing this, we greatly limit the quantity of trash that pollutes our oceans or ends up in landfills.
Another important consideration is food choices. Opting for locally sourced, organic, and sustainably produced food not only supports local farmers but also reduces the environmental impact associated with intensive farming practices and long-distance transportation.
In addition, minimizing food waste is crucial. Planning meals, storing leftovers properly, and composting organic waste can all contribute to reducing the amount of food that ends up in landfills, where it produces harmful greenhouse gases. Shop mindfully to avoid overbuying and throwing away excess food. Additionally, consider composting organic waste to minimize its impact on the environment.
Supporting Socially Responsible Companies
Supporting companies prioritizing social responsibility is a powerful way to make a positive impact. ESG learning equips individuals with the knowledge to identify and support businesses that align with their values.
Research companies and brands to ensure they operate ethically and are committed to sustainable practices. Look for certifications such as B Corp, which guarantee a company’s commitment to social and environmental standards.
Support businesses that actively contribute to social causes and community development. Some companies and businesses donate a portion of their profits to charitable organizations or engage in volunteer initiatives. By purchasing from these companies, individuals can support initiatives that make a tangible difference in society.
Additionally, consider a company’s approach to diversity and inclusion. Support companies that value diversity and actively promote an inclusive work culture. By doing so, you help foster equal opportunities and create a more equitable society.
Conclusion
Individuals possess the power to shape a more sustainable future through their everyday choices. We can collectively make a tremendous impact by embracing ESG initiatives, such as eco-conscious purchasing, responsible consumption, and supporting socially responsible companies. ESG learning empowers individuals to make informed decisions and uphold ethical standards. Our choices, no matter how insignificant they are, can create a ripple effect and inspire others to join in our efforts. We can build a future by prioritizing environmental preservation, social responsibility, and long-term sustainability.
An ornamental palm tree stands in an empty field where there were once houses in Houston. As climate change drives more extreme rain, FEMA says it expects demand for the program to grow in the coming years. Photo: Claire Harbage/NPR
By Rebecca Hersher from National Public Radio • Reposted: June 16, 2023
Most people who move because of climate change in the United States don’t go far, and they end up in homes that are less threatened by the effects of global warming, according to new research. The findings underscore the degree to which climate-related relocation is a hyperlocal phenomenon that can nonetheless protect people from disasters such as floods and hurricanes.
Sociologists at Rice University studied thousands of homeowners who sold their extremely flood-prone homes to the government through a special federal program, administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The program has moved about 50,000 families out of flood zones since the 1980s, and demand for such federal buyouts is growing.
The study is the first to examine where those families ended up living, and it found that most people stayed within a 20-minute drive of their original homes. Most families also moved to homes with lower flood risk, meaning the program successfully accomplished its primary goal.
It makes sense that people are moving only short distances, says A.R. Siders, a faculty member at the Disaster Research Center at the University of Delaware. Most Americans who move for any reason do so within the same county, Siders says. “It’s useful to see that, even when people are moving because of a flood-related program, they are staying close.”
The study casts doubt on the idea that climate change could cause mass migration to places in the U.S. that are less disaster-prone, like New Englandor the Upper Midwest, Siders says.
The findings could also be good news for local officials in places where climate change is already driving catastrophic flooding. The cost of flood damage each year in the U.S. has more than quadrupled since the 1980s, according to FEMA, and the dangers are only growing because of climate-driven extreme rain, more intense hurricanes and rising seas.
In recent years, many local governments have expressed concern that helping people relocate could decimate their tax bases. Knowing that most people stay nearby could help alleviate that concern.
“You can help your constituents reduce their future flood risk without necessarily losing their tax dollars,” says James Elliott, a sociologist at Rice University and one of the authors of the new study, which was published in the journal Environmental Research Letters.
Asking homeowners to voluntarily sell their flood-prone homes to the government is a crucial tool for reducing damage from floods and protecting people. Through the federal buyout program, the government pays market value for homes at risk and then demolishes them, with the goal of preventing future families from moving into harm’s way.
Although demand for the program is growing, it has faced a slew of criticism for making homeowners wait years before their buyout is approved and for not making buyouts available to low-income households.
Relocating makes people much safer, the study found. On average families moved to homes with about 60% less flood risk, compared to where they used to live. That’s equivalent to leaving a home that’s likely to flood with a foot or more of water within the next 30 years, and instead moving somewhere with a small chance of a few inches of floodwater over that same time period.
Housing segregation persists as people move because of climate change
The researchers also considered how race affects where people move when they’re fleeing flooding. Race is an important factor in studies of housing in America, because of widespread, entrenched housing segregation.
That racial segregation shows up in government efforts to help people move away from flood zones. An NPR investigation in 2019 found that majority-white neighborhoods received a disproportionate share of federal funds for flood-related relocation.
The new study goes further, by tracing where residents of those majority-white neighborhoods moved. They found that an overwhelming majority, 96%, of people who started in a majority-white neighborhood also ended up in such a neighborhood after they moved, meaning housing segregation persisted despite migration.
“If you’re moving [away] from a majority-white neighborhood, you almost inevitably and exclusively will only relocate if you can find housing nearby in another majority-white neighborhood,” Elliott says.
The study wasn’t designed to tease apart the reasons for this, although it determined that people did not choose majority-white neighborhoods because those areas have less flood risk overall, or because property values there are higher. Follow-up studies will try to explore why homeowners chose the neighborhoods they did, and how race affected those decisions, Elliott says.
Two legal scholars explain what the National Environmental Policy Act does and doesn’t do. By J.B. Ruhl,Professor of Law, Director, Program on Law and Innovation, and Co-director, Energy, Environment and Land Use Program, Vanderbilt University and James SalzmanProfessor of Environmental Law, University of California, Los Angeles via The Conversation • Reposted: June 15, 2023
The National Environmental Policy Act, enacted in 1970, is widely viewed as a keystone U.S. environmental law. For any major federal action that affects the environment, such as building an interstate highway or licensing a nuclear power plant, NEPA requires relevant agencies to analyze environmental impacts, consider reasonable alternatives and accept public input. It also allows citizens to sue if they believe government has not complied.
Critics argue that NEPA reviews delay projects and drive up costs. In May 2023 negotiations over raising the federal debt ceiling, President Joe Biden agreed to certain changes to NEPA reviews, which both the White House and congressional Republicans said would streamline permitting for infrastructure projects. Legal scholars J.B. Ruhl and James Salzman explain these changes and what they mean for protecting the environment and expanding clean energy production.
What kinds of projects typically require NEPA reviews?
The statutory text of NEPA is quite sparse and open-ended. When people speak of what NEPA requires, they really are talking about how the White House Council on Environmental Quality, or CEQ, federal agencies and the courts have implemented the law over the past 50 years.
The simple requirement is for agencies to create a detailed statement on the impacts of any major federal action that significantly affects the environment. A whole body of law and policy creates filters that sort projects into different NEPA buckets.
First, only projects that will be carried out, funded or authorized by a federal agency are subject to NEPA. That’s a pretty big universe, but it also excludes a lot. For example, a wind farm built on private land by a private utility might not require any federal funding or approval. That means it wouldn’t be subject to NEPA.
If a project is subject to NEPA, the federal agency that has primary oversight assesses its impacts to decide how much analysis is needed. Many agencies use a classification known as categorical exclusions to winnow out minor actions that they know have no significant impacts, either individually or cumulatively. For example, the Interior Department categorically excludes planned burns to clear brush on areas smaller than 4,500 acres.
If the expected impacts are more extensive, but it’s not clear by how much, the agency can prepare an environmental assessment. If that assessment finds the impacts to the human environment will not be significant, that’s the end of the NEPA process.
If the impacts are significant, the agency will prepare a full-blown environmental impact statement, or EIS, which is a far more intensive process. CEQ guidelines establish an elaborate template of topics agencies must evaluate, and the public has opportunities to comment on a draft version.
A CEQ review of EISs prepared by all federal agencies from 2010 through 2018 found that, on average, it took about four and a half years to issue an EIS, not including added time if someone sued. The lengths of these reviews ranged widely but averaged 575 pages.
If an agency conducts lots of the same actions under a particular program, such as timber leasing on federal land, it might conduct a high-level programmatic EIS to cover the large-scale issues and then follow up with individual NEPA analyses for specific projects.
Decisions not to issue an EIS can be challenged in court. So can the EIS itself if critics believe that it’s inadequate.
What are NEPA critics’ central arguments?
Critiques of NEPA come from many different interests. The law mainly affects land development, industry and resource extraction activities such as logging, mining and drilling for oil and gas, particularly on federal public lands.
NEPA requires an impact assessment, but it doesn’t prescribe any particular outcome. Still, it unquestionably can add substantial time and cost to any significant project. If a project is controversial, interested parties can submit public comments that get their views on the record. If opponents aren’t happy with the final EIS, they can sue the agency responsible for the decision in federal court.
Between agency review and litigation, NEPA can add many years to a project’s development timeline before it is “shovel ready.” For example, it takes roughly four to seven years to complete environmental reviews for prescribed burns that the U.S. Forest Service carries out to reduce wildfire risks.
Supporters argue that NEPA reviews have avoided many bad decisions. In our view, the NEPA process is an important feature of the country’s stewardship of its natural resources. But we also share the growing concern that it can be used to delay building renewable energy infrastructure that the U.S. urgently needs to mitigate climate change.
Did the debt ceiling agreement significantly change the NEPA process?
Many of the changes are little more than tweaks. Others codify long-standing practices based on how the Council on Environmental Quality, agencies and courts implement the law.
One notable change is requiring a single lead agency and a single environmental impact statement for projects, even when those projects require multiple agency approvals. There also are some new time and page limits. For example, environmental impact statements will be required to be completed within two years and be no more that 150 pages long for most projects, and 300 pages for the most complex projects.
There also are some changes to definitions, such as what constitutes a “major federal action,” that narrow NEPA’s scope to some degree, although it will take time to sort out their meaning. Overall, we do not see these changes as a major overhaul of NEPA.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers places crushed shells in Maryland’s Tred Avon River as part of efforts to restore the Chesapeake Bay’s historic oyster reefs. After a 2009 NEPA review spotlighted risks associated with the proposed use of disease-resistant imported Chinese oysters, native oysters were used instead. Sean Fritzges, U.S. Army/Flickr
Will the changes speed up work on clean energy systems?
Maybe, but not nearly as much as needed. First, NEPA applies to projects that need federal funding or approval, such as under the Endangered Species Act. Getting that money or agency green light can also involve delays and litigation independent of the NEPA review.
Second, many state and local laws can affect large renewable energy projects, and those statutes can also be used to slow projects down. The bottom line is that to move the needle, politicians will have to do more to reform the project review process.
All of these involve incredibly complex permitting processes, and tweaking NEPA won’t change that. Other hot-button issues – including federal preemption of state and local laws, impacts on Native American cultural lands, and environmental justice – will make further permitting reforms politically difficult.
Even this first small measure was hotly contested, and happened now only because it was tied to the debt limit legislation. As the inclusion of federal approval for the Mountain Valley gas pipeline in the debt ceiling agreement shows, in politics you need a quid in exchange for a quo. We expect to see a lot more deal-making if Congress takes permitting reform seriously.
The current narrative on climate action puts the world in a bind. On one side, present-day action is considered inadequate to achieve the global warming limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius determined by the U.N. On the other side, there is increasing debate over whether that limit is even attainable.
This narrative is dubbed the “doom loop” in a recent report from the U.K.-based think tanks Chatham House and the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). In the doom loop, the focus on crisis consequences and failure to reach targets takes away from the focus required to implement solutions.
In order to move forward, the narrative needs to quickly change to one that encourages action. TriplePundit spoke with Saskia Feast, managing director of global client solutions at Climate Impact Partners, about how collective private-sector action can help to catalyze that change — starting with Fortune Global 500 companies.
We don’t need large investments to create change
Fortune Global 500 companies made more than $2.2 trillion in annual profits over the last three years, according to a recent report by Climate Impact Partners. Investing only 1.5 percent of that — about $33.5 billion — to fund carbon reduction projects like forest conservation, reforestation and micro-renewables would be a massive step toward achieving the transformational change required to hit global climate action targets.
On average, each Global 500 company made $6.7 billion over the last year, according to the report. Committing 1.5 percent of those profits ($100 million) could cut 7.8 million tons of carbon emissions, plant 60,000 trees and protect 120,000 hectares of forest. If every company in the index did the same each year, it would amount to more than 2.6 billion tons in carbon reductions — even more than what scientists say is necessary to cap global temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius.
To put this corporate expense into perspective, on average the world’s largest companies spend 12 percent of their annual profits on research and development, 27 percent on sales and administrative expenses, 8.7 percent on marketing and 8.2 percent on information technology, according to the report.
Offsets or no offsets?
For more than 20 years, Climate Impact Partners has worked with businesses to support over 600 carbon removal and reduction projects in 56 countries. But its work faces criticism around carbon offsets.
“There is a lot of criticism of the companies who are taking action around offsetting carbon emissions and this idea that it is greenwashing,” Feast said. “By not criticizing the companies that are not taking action, those companies are feeling safer.”
Saskia Feast, managing director of global client solutions at Climate Impact Partners. Photo courtesy of Climate Impact Partners.
Inaction on climate change could cost the global economy $178 trillion over the next 50 years, or a 7.6 percent cut to global gross domestic product (GDP) in the year 2070 alone, according to a recent report from the Deloitte Center for Sustainable Progress.
Carbon offsetting is a long-debated method for companies and other large emitters to get involved. Supporters claim it is effective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions while conserving natural resources in sectors like transportation, energy and agriculture.
Some critics dismiss the practice as a flawed system that has negligible impact on reducing emissions. They argue offsets are generated by projects that enable polluting industries to continue their harmful practices.
When a company first starts its carbon-neutral journey, it might need to offset a higher proportion of emissions, Feast said. But putting a price on it forces emission reductions over time.
“Once you start putting a price on carbon, you start measuring it and looking for strategic ways to reduce it,” she said. “That helps you drive the internal reduction strategy or the adoption of renewable energy within your organization. The role of the offsetting market is just to help transition us to the low-carbon economy.”
The number of companies using, or planning to use, an internal carbon price increased by 80 percent over just five years, according to a 2021 report by the environmental disclosure management nonprofit CDP.
The return on sustainability investments
Today, financial success and sustainable practices are increasingly tied to each other. “The business of sustainability reporting has improved dramatically over the last 20 years,” Feast said. “What we’re seeing now is companies including those metrics in their annual reports, like a carbon footprint or water use risk. So, the metrics are merging, which is a great development in the market. We’re seeing sustainability leaders, who are our clients, now working directly with investor relations, their CFO and financial teams.”
The business case is stronger than before as company sustainability measures impact reputation, market value, and overall ability to attract and retain employees. And now there are many carbon footprint and ESG measurement tools that enable business leaders to truly consider how their operations impact people and the planet.
Smaller companies can fight climate change, too
Investing in carbon reduction and removal is for every company — small, medium or large. Smaller companies that want to act don’t need a grand plan, Feast said. They can start making decisions in incremental steps like measuring their footprint, supporting renewable energy, making climate-friendly products, and discussing the price of carbon on their business.
“We want to encourage companies to take action,” she said.”Get out there, start taking your steps and maybe one day run a marathon.”
COP28 Global Stocktake: Tracking progress to 1.5 degrees Celsius
As the baton moves from climate technicians to politicians at the COP28 Global Stocktake, which is also commented on with skepticism, policies driving increased financing of climate action could make a significant impact.
Emerging markets and developing economies must collectively invest at least $1 trillion in energy infrastructure by 2030 and $3 trillion to $6 trillion per year across all sectors by 2050 to mitigate climate change by substantially reducing greenhouse gas emissions, according to the International Monetary Fund.
An additional $140 billion to $300 billion a year is needed by 2030 to adapt to the environmental consequences of climate change, such as rising sea levels and intensifying droughts. This could skyrocket to between $520 billion and $1.75 trillion annually after 2050 depending on how effective climate mitigation measures are.
“One of the most important things is to move away from talking about climate financing — and actually doing the financing,” Feast said. “The more money we can put to finance these projects, the more we will be reducing emissions going forward.”
Creatives for Climate’s ‘secret agents of change’ will be prowling the festival calling on individuals, agencies and brands to tackle greenwashing at the source. From Creatives for Climate • Reposted: June 7, 2029
At this year’s Cannes Lions Festival of Creativity (19th-23rd June), NGO Creatives for Climate will launch a new tool aimed at building a collective of change agents united in its mission to tackle greenwashing at the source.
Creatives for Climate ‘secret agents’ will be roaming the festival with the organization’s Greenwash Watch toolkit — interrupting the rosé-fueled conversations and business-as-usual meetings to firmly center the conversation on climate action within advertising.
The tool in question, the Greenwash Swatch, is based on a framework created by think tank Planet Tracker that identifies an increasingly complex greenwashing landscape — including new trends such as greencrowding, greenrinsing, and greenshifting.
Formatted into a handy paint swatch booklet that fits into handbags and pockets, the toolkit is designed to be a reference for attendees to identify examples of greenwashing at any moment — providing a simple and provocative way to fuel conversations about brand accountability. For the second year in a row, the #greenwashwatch will hijack conversation at Cannes Lions and online, and create a counternarrative from ordinary people back to brands — subverting power and driving conversation far and wide.
“Creativity for good means nothing if we do not rise as an industry to tackle creativity for bad,” says Creatives for Climate Initiator and Chairwoman Lucy von Sturmer. “Standing against greenwashing is standing against tactics of delay and increasingly illegal brand behavior. Unfortunately, as more agencies and brands jump on the ‘green wagon,’ we expect to see a tonne of criminal behavior on the Croisette this year.”
During the festival, to gather momentum and recruit more agents to join, Creatives for Climate is partnering with Clean Creatives to launch the Change Agent Happy Hour — Tuesday 20th June from 19:00-20:30 — where it will be issuing an additional 100 toolkits to attendees to inspire collective action within their professional organizations and across their broader networks.
Creatives for Climate has also partnered with the Clean Creatives Climate Summit at the Embassy of Dutch Creativity and will be hosting a panel titled “Tackling the climate crisis is tackling the talent crisis” on Tuesday 20th June. This panel will feature a broad range of actors from across the industry – brand representatives, agency leaders as well as grassroots activists and entrepreneurs on the ground, exploring questions such as:
Can solving the climate crisis solve the talent crisis?
Can upskilling for climate build better agencies and brands?
This year’s action at Cannes builds on the release of the Creatives for Climate’s landmark Greenwash Watch Course, launched at Cannes in 2022. The training is a cross-industry effort created in collaboration with industry experts such as professor Gill Wilson and Patagonia Head of Studio Alex Weller to rapidly scale the industry’s ability to challenge briefs, identify greenwashing and deliver projects with real impact.
The Greenwash Watch agents will reward those that use the Greenwash Swatch tool online during Cannes Lions week with free access to the Greenwash Watch training program. The aim is to bridge the gap between advertising and action — recruiting attendees and their businesses to become greenwashing ‘secret agents of change.’
Check out the many ways that sustainability can introduce opportunities to your business. By Stephen P. Ashkin from cmmonline.com • Reposted: June 6, 2023
Salespeople are often taught to see a customer’s or prospect’s problem as an opportunity, because solving the problem can lead to business growth. The professional cleaning industry can apply a similar attitude when considering problems related to sustainability.
Industry problems can be overwhelming, especially when considering that the global cleaning industry is composed of thousands of companies, including service providers, in-house cleaning operations, manufacturers, and distributors; tens of thousands of buildings, offices, and warehouses; hundreds of thousands of cars, service vehicles, and delivery trucks; and more than 100 million workers worldwide. However, by embracing sustainable practices in their own operations, investing in new technologies, and engaging with customers and building occupants to promote a more sustainable future, all facets of the industry can take full advantage of the opportunities sustainability presents.
Reap the benefits of reduction and conservation
One of the biggest sustainability opportunities is the ability to reduce waste and conserve resources. The industry can significantly reduce its environmental impact in several ways, such as utilizing green cleaning products and energy efficient equipment, reducing water usage, cleaning with cold water, turning off lights when leaving a room, and driving more fuel-efficient vehicles. These practices not only help reduce the amount of waste generated and conserve resources, but also save money on energy and water.
Seize opportunities for education
The industry can seize opportunities to educate others on sustainability and engage with them regarding its importance. By sharing information about sustainable practices and highlighting their benefits, the industry can help raise awareness and promote change. The industry can also work with customers and stakeholders to identify new opportunities for improvement and develop innovative solutions to sustainability challenges.
Create a path for others to follow
Perhaps the best way to educate is to lead by example. By embracing sustainable practices and demonstrating a commitment to reduce its environmental footprint, the industry can inspire others to do the same. These commitments include tracking one’s own use of energy, fuels, and water. These actions not only inspire others, but have a significant impact on the environment and can help promote a more sustainable future for the planet.
Stephen P. Ashkin is president of The Ashkin Group, a consulting firm specializing in green cleaning and sustainability. He can be reached at steve@ashkingroup.com.
In a world where climate change is increasingly apparent, we all encounter people who are changing their behavior to help protect the environment: People who cycle to work to avoid consuming fuel, carry their own cutlery to avoid using disposable plastic forks, or hang onto their recyclable waste, bypassing trash cans until they can find a proper place to recycle it.
These people have two things in common: On the one hand, they are concerned enough about the environment to change their everyday habits. On the other hand, on the surface this behavior change does not include buying products that are branded as environmentally friendly. Because their current route to sustainable living focuses on cutting down their consumption (of fuel, plastic, home energy, and the like), they are not making the connection between sustainability and the products they need to buy.
We call this group “Conscious Nonconsumers,” and they now represent about 32% of all U.S. consumers, according to recent Bain research. They have become something of a holy grail for large brands searching for new sources of growth.
There’s no question that consumers are becoming more concerned about environmental issues, if only because they are hitting people at home. A recent Pew Research poll found that 71% of Americans have experienced an extreme weather event in their community within the past year. Coming face-to-face with climate change has now led 52% of Americans to say they are “extremely or very concerned” about the impact of climate change, according to Bain Consumer Lab’s study of nearly 4,000 U.S. consumers in 2022 and confirmed with a follow-up survey of 1,000 consumers in 2023.
This rising interest in environmental issues has paved the way for a potential $365 billion market for “Conscious Nonconsumers” (on top of the $278 billion market for “Conscious Consumers”), according to Bain research, if companies remove barriers that are inhibiting purchases. It’s a market that spans everything from products with reduced packaging to shampoo requiring less water.
Fully capturing this opportunity, however, will be a challenge for consumer goods companies because consumers’ growing concerns are not uniformly reflected in their purchasing behavior. There is an undeniable “say-do” gap between what consumers say they want and what they are actually putting in their baskets. Yet the rewards for narrowing this gap are huge. When consumers try and like a sustainable product, they are more likely to become vocal advocates. For example, 44% of those recommending environmental, social, and governance (ESG) products are superpromoters, meaning they recommend the product to more than 10 people, compared with just 22% of people who recommend for any other reason, based on our research.
To understand the landscape and biggest opportunities for consumer goods companies and retailers, Bain’s recent survey of U.S. consumers looked at such factors as their concern about climate change and the number of lifestyle changes made for sustainability reasons. Our research enabled us to identify five well-defined segments, all of which span age and income levels:
Climate change deniers: These consumers don’t believe that the climate is changing. As such, they do not engage with ESG and do not intend to. They make up about 4% of the U.S. consumers.
Consumers of habit: These consumers tend to simplify their lives by buying products they know and love. They are not actively concerned about climate change, so sustainability is not on their minds when shopping. They make up about 30% of the U.S. consumers.
Curious consumers: These consumers buy eco-friendly products due to a curiosity about these products, which are often branded as premium. They are not actively concerned about the environment, but they like to try new premium products. They make up about 11% of the U.S. consumers.
Conscious nonconsumers: These are people who are actively concerned about climate change and have several environmentally friendly lifestyle habits, but do not buy eco-friendly-branded products. They make up about 32% of the U.S. consumers — the largest group.
Conscious consumers: These consumers are actively concerned about the planet and consider a product’s environmental credentials when shopping, as they see this as a route to more sustainable living. They make up about 24% of the U.S. consumers.
It is the Conscious Nonconsumers — a large group that has flown under the radar of many consumer products companies and retailers — who offer a large, untapped opportunity. We focused much of our follow-up research on this segment, attempting to discover what’s keeping them from buying and what consumer goods companies and retailers can do to capture this market.
There is no single demographic profile of the Conscious Nonconsumer. They span ages as well as income and education levels. They’re as likely to live in urban areas as small towns. What most have in common is a desire to match their current lifestyle changes — lowering thermostats, cycling to work, and obsessively recycling, for example. We also see that while many Conscious Nonconsumers are opting out of trying to shop sustainably, they do have positive intentions. An impressive 71% of Conscious Nonconsumers say they would pay more for sustainable products, in theory, if there is a direct benefit, if it doesn’t compromise other factors, and if they believe it is really better for the planet, employees, or suppliers. Among our survey respondents, 44% of Conscious Nonconsumers aspire to increase spending on such brands in the next three years.
Barriers to buying
But since Conscious Nonconsumers are not currently buying sustainable products, as part of our study, we asked additional questions to understand the barriers.
The first barrier — and probably the one most difficult to overcome — is that these consumers are not actively thinking about sustainability when they are shopping. This barrier, reported by 34% of Conscious Nonconsumers, highlights how this segment thinks about sustainability. They focus on reducing their consumption of fuel, home energy, and the like, with less concern about the products they buy.
The second barrier is one faced by Conscious Nonconsumers who are thinking about sustainability when shopping: 37% percent say there are difficult trade-offs preventing them from making informed purchasing decisions. They have trouble understanding and comparing the carbon footprint of competing products, for example, and often start with only a vague understanding of what makes a product sustainable or not. We saw this knowledge gap come to life when we asked consumers across segments to determine which of two items had a lower carbon footprint. On average, 75% of respondents in all consumer categories did not know or were incorrect in their answer. For example, only 11% correctly answered that single-use plastic bags have a lower carbon footprint than single-use cotton bags. Only 22% correctly answered that inorganic vegetables have a lower carbon footprint than organic meat. This knowledge gap is a barrier to making the right choices in sustainable purchases.
The final barriers to purchasing are tangible. Price was cited as an obstacle to purchasing by 34% of Conscious Nonconsumers; those higher prices mean that consumers need to work harder to justify purchasing. Another issue: It often is harder to find sustainable products. For example, consumers may need to go to a specialized store or a different department within a regular supermarket to find a wider range of sustainable goods.
How to reach Conscious Nonconsumers
Brands and retailers can acknowledge their own accountability in the say-do gap and take immediate action to remove barriers that consumers and shoppers face. In our 2022 survey, half of U.S. consumers believe brands and retailers are responsible for helping consumers shop sustainably — compared with 19% who feel it’s the government’s responsibility, for example. There are three basic actions for brands and retailers:
Simplify decision-making for consumers.
Brands can help boost awareness and close the knowledge gap by highlighting specific, measurable ESG features that educate consumers while guiding choice. Beauty company Natura clearly spells out the specific, positive effects of its fair-trade practices with communities in Brazil’s Amazon rainforest. On its website, it reports: “By buying Natura EKOS products you are helping to improve the income of 2,000 families in these Brazilian farming communities — a total of almost 8,500 people. And it is also thanks to Natura EKOS products and the work of these communities that 1.8 million hectares of forest have been conserved for sustainable resource use and a better future for generations to come.” Natura EKOS product packaging uses clear terms (such as vegan, Amazon rainforest ingredients, fair trade, and rainforest conservation), and quantifies the products’ benefits, such as the fact that purchasing refillable products results in a 25% reduction in plastic for EKOS products. It consciously avoids confusing consumers with multiple ESG symbols.
For retailers, simplifying consumer decisions means making sustainable products part of consumers’ purchase journey. That could involve helping consumers easily identify sustainable products. For example, Walmart offers an online collection of products by companies the retailer classifies as “Sustainability Leaders” and uses a “Great for You” icon to help consumers identify healthier food options on the shelf. Retailers can also benefit by making sustainable products more available at the moment when consumers are making their purchasing decision by keeping them on the same shelf as everything else.
Integrate ESG into existing reasons to choose.
Consumers already balance competing priorities of quality, price, health, and convenience. Adding a new ESG dimension creates additional complexity that may force consumers not to choose sustainable options. The most effective companies weave ESG into those existing considerations. For example, insurgents have proven that ESG can make a product more convenient to purchase (via plastic-free automated subscriptions like Smol), more affordable (via durable, reusable products like UpCircle’s makeup removal cotton pads), and simpler (via multibenefit and multifunctional products like Care Natural Beauty). Incumbent brands must follow their lead. Retailers can accelerate sustainability adoption by reinforcing the positive side of the cost-benefit equation through incentives. Iceland, for example, offers “reverse” vending machines where PET bottles are returned in exchange for store credit.
Evolve existing brands.
Our research found that Conscious Nonconsumers are likely to value same-but-better versionsof products they love as long as they do not come with a significantly higher price tag. There are two fundamental approaches brands take: innovating on packaging design and adapting product formats or ingredients. As an example of the former, consider Unilever’s TRESemmé brand, with shampoo bottles made of 100% recycled and recyclable plastic. For its part, retailer Sainsbury’s sells meat and chicken in trayless packaging and has eliminated single-use plastic across its own-brand dip pots. As an example of adapting ingredients, Mustela introduced plant-based baby towels as a plastic-free version of its original baby towel.
Converting Conscious Nonconsumers is a matter of providing viable and easy-to-find options — and making the value proposition clear. And with value-for-money a critical consideration for this segment, the brands and retailers that make the biggest inroads will be those that can also make their sustainable products affordable. For most companies, that requires balancing the delivery of sustainable products with cost savings. It’s a tricky balance, but one that will help companies achieve profitable growth by convincing consumers that, in addition to recycling, biking to work, and lowering the heat, they can change their buying habits, too.
A 3M manufacturing facility in Cottage Grove, Minnesota, in 2018. Photo: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg via Getty Images.
By Jacob Knutson from axis.com • Reposted: June 5, 2023
Major chemical producers have agreed to pay billions of dollars to settle claims from U.S. water providers over toxic “forever chemicals” pollution.
Why it matters: The settlements are a significant step forward in the effort to reduce potentially dangerous chemicals in water systems across the country.
The health effects of the chemicals are still being studied, but exposure to certain levels of PFAS has been linked to adverse health effects in humans and animals, including increased risk of kidney or testicular cancer.
Driving the news: Chemours, DuPont and Corteva said Friday they reached a $1.19 billion settlement with water providers around the country.
The water providers had alleged that the companies were responsible for environmental pollution from firefighting foams they manufactured that contained PFAS.
Though the companies denied the allegations, the settlement would resolve hundreds of lawsuits against them that were consolidated in the federal district court for South Carolina, which must finalize the settlement for it to take effect.
What they’re saying: John O’Connell, the board president of the National Rural Water Association, said in a statement that the settlement “is the beginning of helping our utility members in the fight against PFAS.”
The group works with 50 state associations representing more than 31,000 water and wastewater utility systems, and helped filed a lawsuit on behalf of its members.
Yes, but: Not included in the settlements are systems operated by states and the U.S. government, some smaller drinking water systems, and systems in the lower Cape Fear River Basin of North Carolina, which has been plagued by high levels of PFAS.
How it works: The durable synthetic chemicals, which resist degradation by repelling oil and water and withstanding high temperatures, have been used in hundreds of nonstick, water- and oil-repellent, and fire-resistant products.
If the chemicals enter the environment through production or waste streams, they can resist breaking down for hundreds of years while contaminating water sources and bioaccumulating in fish, wildlife, livestock, and people.
Research has shown that reducing levels of PFAS in drinking water or switching to other water distributors will likely require municipalities to invest millions of dollars into new infrastructure and incur ongoing maintenance costs.
For example, officials in Cape Fear allocated $46 million and a recurring annual operating cost of $2.9 million to upgrade a treatment plant designed to filter PFAS from drinking water.
Meanwhile, 3M — a major PFAS producer — has also reached a tentative settlement worth at least $10 billion with water providers, Bloomberg reported Friday.
News of a potential settlement came just days before the company’s first federal trial over PFAS pollution claims.
Facing extensive PFAS litigation — including a lawsuit from the Dutch government — 3M announced in December 2022 that it would stop manufacturing and using the chemicals by the end of 2025
By Mary Mazzoni from Triple Pundit • Reposted: June 2, 2023
We hear it time and time again: People aren’t ready, willing or interested in changing their lifestyles for the sake of sustainability. They’re too busy, too broke or too ambivalent to think about how their choices impact the world around them. And until they change their tune, there’s nothing brands can do about it — except sell them more stuff.
This prevailing narrative has been around for decades, but data continues to show that it isn’t representative of how people really feel. The public is increasingly aware of the environmental and social challenges we face — from climate change to wealth inequality — and they want to be part of the solution.
Over half of Americans say they’ve already made lifestyle changes like shopping secondhand, purchasing products in reusable or refillable packaging, and buying less overall in order to reduce their impact on people and the planet, according to a December survey conducted by TriplePundit and our parent company, 3BL Media, in partnership with the research technology firm Glow.
Let’s break down what U.S. consumers are really saying about sustainability, how it factors into their own lives, and how brands can respond differently than they have in the past.
Americans rank climate change and economic inequality among the top three challenges facing society today, only behind their anxiety about keeping food on the table. Download the report to learn more.
People are willing to change their behavior for the sake of sustainability
Shopping secondhand. Purchasing products made from, or packaged in, recycled materials. Choosing items in reusable or refillable containers. Shopping in the grocery bulk aisle to avoid packaging altogether. Some would have us believe these lifestyle shifts are too expensive or too cumbersome for Americans. But more than 60 percent of respondents to our survey said they’re already making these changes or intend to do so within the next six months.
Of course the say/do gap — which refers to the difference between what people say in surveys and what they actually do in their daly lives — is always a factor. Even so, the interest in these lifestyle changes is significant and runs counter to preconceived notions that consumers don’t really want — or aren’t really ready — to change their lifestyles for sustainability reasons.
People even expressed interest in behaviors that are commonplace in other countries but often dismissed as something that could “never work” in the U.S. For example, over half of respondents said they would be willing to take packaging like bottles back to a store for wash and refill.
More than 60 percent of U.S. consumers are willing to adopt lifestyle changes like shopping secondhand, opting for the bulk aisle, or choosing items in reusable or refillable packaging. Download the report to learn more.
Our findings support existing research on general readiness for behavior change: In another 2022 survey, for example, half of responding U.S. adults said they’re willing to accept 95 percent of the changes needed to avert the climate crisis and restore ecosystems. The survey also revealed the extent of climate anxiety among the public, with 1 out of 4 respondents worried they may have to give up long-term goals like starting a family.
When it comes to packaging in particular, our findings indicate that 75 percent of U.S. consumers are willing to choose reusable alternatives — echoing 2022 polling from Trivium Packaging which found the same. The trade publication Packaging World recently declared reusable and refillable packaging to be a “global opportunity,” with sales forecast to grow by 4.9 percent annually to $53.4 billion by 2027.
How brands can respond to shifting consumer preferences
Many advocates point to the calls for consumer behavior change as merely a delay tactic from large companies: If the narrative keeps people focused on their own behaviors — analyzing everything from cup preferences to clothing choice — they won’t have energy left to push for a shift in corporate practices or government regulations.
In the past, this may have been true, with consumers and brands pitted against each other in a cyclical blame-game while the poor get poorer and global temperatures rise. But findings like these indicate we’ve reached a critical moment when ideologies can align, and brands can show up as partners for consumers looking to play a role in the future they want to see.
Leveraging our nearly two decades of experience in communicating about sustainability, TriplePundit and 3BL Media’s Consumer Insights and Sustainability Benchmark report includes key action items for businesses looking to respond to consumer sentiment in a positive way.
“Understanding people’s uncertainties and anxieties about the future, and what they want to see from business, gives companies the opportunity to communicate and present themselves as part of the solution that consumers are looking for,” the report reads. “The next piece of the puzzle is to figure out how businesses can tailor their communications to appeal to consumer interests and bring them on board their journey to a more sustainable world.”
In particular, we highlight how brands can adopt a more meaningful role of partner and educator — rather than simply another purveyor of goods and services. “Since consumers want to be part of the solution, help them do that by sharing actionable information,” the report reads. “It may be as simple as telling them how to make your product last longer or how to lower their personal carbon footprint with a checklist on your website. You can celebrate your company’s successes by applauding theirs.”
A fire burns in a in Porto Velho, Brazil, 09 September 2019. Photo Credit: FERNANDO BIZERRA JR [Fernando Bizerra Jr (EPA-EFE)]
If businesses are to take corporate sustainability seriously, they will need to add relevant sustainability expertise to their boards, argue Nicolas Sauviat and Sanjini Jain.By Nicolas Sauviat and Sanjini Jain from euractiv.com • Reposted: June 2, 2023
On 1 June, the European Parliament is due to take a plenary vote on a Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), legislation which aims to foster sustainable and responsible corporate behaviour throughout global value chains. If it’s formally adopted, it will require companies to identify – and, where necessary, prevent, end or mitigate – the adverse impacts of their activities on human rights, in terms of issues like child labour and worker exploitation, as well as the environment, for problems like pollution and biodiversity loss.
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) was heralded internationally as the ‘Paris moment’ for nature to lead the world towards a more harmonious relationship between nature, people and the economy. If we have any hope of living up to this moment and fulfilling the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – the blueprint for how we achieve a better, fairer and greener world in the short time left – the private sector must take responsibility for its actions.
One key issue in this vote up for debate is whether now is the time to challenge boardroom’s traditional focus on generating wealth for its shareholders, and to reorientate their focus to provide value for all its stakeholders.
With scientists projecting that the crucial 1.5°C global average temperature threshold will be temporarily breached in just five years, we are running out of time to change direction. But do boards have the needed skills and expertise are required to meet this challenge, and should legislation be used to accelerate their action?
This could be a crucial moment to close the corporate accountability gap on sustainability. As things stand, business action remains largely voluntary. And yet, we cannot keep this planet viable for life without the private sector.
At the World Benchmarking Alliance (WBA), we assess corporate progress against the SDGs. From our experience we know that company boards are key to action on sustainability. Only by ensuring that they have the right knowledge and expertise can the accountability gap be closed, and progress made.
As things stand, most big companies have set sustainability targets. Many have pledged to a net-zero carbon objective. However, very few actually provide the necessary details on how they will go about accomplishing these ambitions. The data reported by businesses often lacks substance. Knowingly or not, many companies oversell their sustainability credentials.
A major reason for this is a skill and knowledge gap, especially within companies’ top executive forces. This impacts the boardroom’s understanding and subsequent ability to address Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) risks. Indeed, a recent survey by the professional services experts at PwC found that only 27% of boards fully understand ESG risks.
Our own research delivered even worse findings. Assessing corporate progress on protecting the natural world, WBA’s Nature Benchmark examined the governance structures of 400 of the world’s largest companies. It looked into whether they have accountability systems in place for achieving their sustainable development goals – including governance bodies with the right expertise to understand the material pressures on nature created by their business activities.
While nearly 70% of companies assigned responsibility for their sustainability strategy to their board, just 2% of boards possessed the relevant sustainability expertise. This stark discrepancy highlights the fact that boards are accepting their sustainability responsibility without a clear understanding of what it actually entails.
Boards must rapidly adapt to their new sustainability role, lest they become an obstacle to their companies’ futures. In this context, we desperately need corporate board members with CVs beyond banking and accounting. Specialist scientific committees can also help provide boards with credible information.
Businesses should ensure that boards have the expertise to tackle their most relevant sustainability topics. This could be done by demonstrating that they have undertaken training by a certified organisation. Alternatively, they could have board members with previous experience in specialist organisations, like consulting firms or NGOs, or have authored academic studies.
As we hurtle towards irreversible environmental tipping points, we hope that European legislators pass the CSDDD with a legal mandate for boards to have a duty to oversee and sign off on their due diligence policies. This mandate should be accompanied by further guidance to ensure boards demonstrate relevant ESG expertise. That’s how to close the corporate accountability gap on sustainability and drive action.
Now is the time for boardrooms to shift from their traditional focus on generating wealth for their shareholders towards generating value for all stakeholders. After all, no company will profit from an uninhabitable planet.
Nicolas Sauviat and Sanjini Jain are researchers at the World Benchmarking Alliance (WBA).
By Peter Evans, Chief Strategy Officer, McFadyen Digital; Co-Chair, MIT Platform Strategy Summit and Faculty, Fast Future Executive via Forbes • Reposted: May 31, 2023
The world is grappling with a sustainability crisis, but the emerging circular economy shows promise as a solution. Circular platforms, which combine digital marketplaces with circular models of production and consumption, can play a vital role in increasing the reuse, repair and recycling of valuable resources.
To date, platform marketplaces have largely supported linear consumption, with products and packaging becoming waste after use. Through the examples below, I hope to show how businesses can use circular platforms in consumer and B2B markets to help reduce waste, improve material security and drive innovation.
Consumer-Oriented Circular Platforms
There are several circular platforms emerging that are facilitating the sharing, leasing, repairing, refurbishing and recycling in consumer markets. The following are some lessons I think we can learn from them.
Building Community
One benefit of using a circular platform is the ability to build community. As an example, Poshmark, a popular online marketplace that connects users to buy and sell things like used clothing and beauty products, has a social media-like interface that helps foster a sense of community among its users. Including a community aspect in your platform can enhance the overall user experience, increase user loyalty and boost the visibility of users’ listings. Look for ways that users can connect with each other, share inspiration and receive feedback.
Giving Assurance
Platforms can also help provide quality assurance. Backmarket is an online marketplace for refurbished electronics that ensures the quality of products sold through its marketplace through rigorous testing and certification processes. This gives buyers confidence in the reliability and performance of refurbished electronics, overcoming concerns associated with second-hand purchases.
Providing Affordability
Too Good To Go offers a platform to purchase surplus food from local restaurants and grocery stores, reducing food waste and enhancing affordability. Any way that you can find to increase accessibility to sustainable options is a smart move in this economy.
Enabling B2B Transactions For The Circular Economy
Circular platforms also facilitate circular transactions between businesses. Like their consumer-facing counterparts, platforms in the B2B marketplace can showcase benefits.
Obtaining Data
One main thing you can take advantage of with platforms is the ability to gather otherwise hard-to-obtain data. For example, Scrap Monster connects buyers and sellers in the scrap metal trading industry and is able to provide unique data for scrap metal pricing that cannot be found elsewhere.
Enhance Discovery
Often the “waste” from one industry can be a valuable input into another industry. Platforms can provide discovery engines that help procurement teams in one industry find useful used materials from another industry. Rheaply, which enables buying and selling of construction waste, recently expanded to play this discovery role when it acquired Materials Marketplace and its network of 2,600 partners.
Allow Cross-Broder Transactions
Rebound Plastic Exchange is a trading platform for recycled plastic and is just one example of how you can significantly reduce friction associated with cross-border transactions. To illustrate, Rebound Plastic Exchange provides standardized processes and procedures for listing, communication, pricing and compliance with complex international rules governing the moment of waste materials. When it comes to complex processes like this, customers appreciate a platform that can streamline and simplify.
The Overall Power of Platforms
One of the strengths of platform business models is their ability to scale rapidly. As they facilitate user interactions, they can quickly grow to reach a large audience, creating a positive feedback loop where more users attract more users, leading to exponential growth.
You can also use platforms to leverage discovery engines to reach a wider audience. Discovery engines help users find new content and products, which can attract more visitors to the platform. Using data and algorithms can personalize recommendations to individual users based on their interests and behavior.
Circular platforms, specifically, can aid in responding to the growth of extended producer responsibility (EPR) laws. These laws assign responsibility for managing a product’s end-of-life environmental impacts to manufacturers or brand owners, reducing the burden on taxpayers. By joining a marketplace, industries can improve recycling rates, reduce resource consumption and prevent pollution.
Emerging Opportunities
In addition to participating in existing circular marketplaces, I see new emerging opportunities to establish circular markets. One area is around battery recycling. The shift to electric vehicles is creating significant demand for the materials for EV battery production. Ideally, circular platforms can orchestrate the collection and recycling of batteries, thereby reducing the pressure to expand mining capacity.
Another example involves recycling plastics used in the construction of new cars. BMW is already using recycled fishing nets to make headliners and floor mats for a few of their other models. Imagine if a marketplace was established in which all car manufacturers participated in a used plastics exchange. Given the size of the automotive sector, such a marketplace would create significant demand for waste plastics that are increasingly choking landfills and the world’s oceans.
Challenges
Creating and growing circular marketplaces is not without challenges. Like traditional platforms, circular platforms also must overcome the classic “chicken and egg” dilemma of attracting enough supply and demand to secure sufficient transactions.
Circular marketplaces often meet resistance as they can require changes to traditional procurement and supply chain management. Companies may need to rework business processes and align incentives with various stakeholders to create a closed-loop system.
Other barriers to acknowledge include the need for trust to ensure the quality and reliability of recycled materials. This requires things like testing and digital twin technology to capture, store and update critical information. Like other marketplaces, circular platforms must also ensure timely delivery, manage inventory and handle returns and refunds, which can all be complex, time-consuming and resource intensive.
Circular platforms offer a promising path toward a sustainable future by enhancing material security, reducing waste and driving innovation. While the transition to a fully circular economy may take time, I believe significant progress can be made by adopting circular platforms. These platforms can help incentivize companies to design products that are more durable, repairable and recyclable. By shifting from a linear “take-make-dispose” economy to circular models of production and consumption, we can pave the way for a more sustainable world.
The ‘a-ha’ moments continued this week at Brand-Led Culture Change — where we heard how more brands, NGOs, retailers and more are nudging more sustainable purchasing decisions, measuring the efficacy of social-impact programs and pursuing partnerships that create shared value for both brands and communities.
How Walmart collaborates for sustainable innovation
Another Monday morning workshop kicked off with moderator Solitaire Townsend, co-founder of Futerra, asking attendees to reflect on which sustainable behavior they can begin implementing into their daily lives. Addressed as ‘eco sins’ stakeholders can confront to live more sustainably, the room went around and shared key examples from SB’s 9 Sustainable Behaviors that resonate across many stakeholders — including preventing food waste, switching to more renewable energy, and purchasing sustainably made consumer goods. Attendees quickly realized that while we all wish to live up to our values and stay committed to them, outside factors can often get in the way of this commitment — hence, the pesky intention-action gap when it comes to adoption of more sustainable behaviors.
The session then proceeded with insights from professionals across Walmart’s Marketing and Sustainability departments — Christopher Kreutzner (Senior Counsel of Sustainability & ESG), Marco Reyes (Senior Director of Sustainability), and Courtney Killingsworth(Marketing Planning & Strategy, Brand & Reputation). The three panelists shared how they work together across departments to ensure that business goals can be met while prioritizing people and planet.
For example, Reyes uses his subject matter expertise to identify where Walmart can make an impact and scale that impact across the value chain. Killingsworth uses her influence to advocate for the voice of the customer; and Kreutzner ensures that Walmart mitigates risk while being able to achieve its sustainability targets. More and more consumers report wanting to make sustainable choices in their purchasing habits, and Walmart can show them where to start. Recently, Walmart launched its Built for Better initiative — a collaboration across functional teams that allows customers to add three criteria to their purchase decisions: For you, For communities, For the planet.
The panelists highlighted the cost of inaction and how crucial it is to understand different perspectives to create buy-in amidst competing priorities. Reyes admitted that nobody has all the answers, for the solution is not binary; he pointed out that friction between goals is good as it sharpens each other with the right set of values. He went on to say we are all making each other sharper towards a common goal.
Workshop attendees then engaged in a speed round of making a pitch on sustainable behavior — encompassing the behavior itself, three barriers that may be in the way, and three benefits that will overcome these barriers. Pitches included examples from solar energyand sustainable packaging to prompting more thoughtful consumption by embedding nature images inside snack wrappers.
The session concluded with all three panelists highlighting the importance of everyone in an organization being able to be part of solutions. The Walmart team said the retailer aims to include everyone in the conversation, from all lived experiences; and through their collaboration on sustainability goals, hopes to become an example of how to effectively do so.
Elevating the ‘S’ in ESG: Building culture, measuring impact and how to get things done
Today’s brands are expected to be authentic and transparent, and must find ways to manifest these as KPIs to achieve business goals. A Monday afternoon panel discussed the challenges in successfully executing against social social-impact goals and highlighted what brands can do now to build internal buy-in, shape more impactful social initiatives, and measure the value for the company and external stakeholders.
Michelle Waring, Steward for Sustainability and Everyday Good at Tom’s of Maine, said the company approaches ‘S’ by grounding it in transparency and commitment. The company has recently looked at its role as a heritage environmental brand that was founded as a business for good. 50 years later, the space has changed: Now, putting people at the center is key to an effective sustainability strategy, and is necessary to transition environmentalism away from a predominantly white-centric pursuit to one that engages the most vulnerable and efficacious stakeholders — such as BIPOC communities, frontline and fenceline communities, etc.
Kevin Wilhelm of Point B pointed out that the sentiment behind movements such as Black Lives Matter, Me Too, etc have always existed; but recent highly publicized events have spurred brands to make grandiose statements. Three years later, though, most brands haven’t followed through — and consumers have noticed. They are demanding follow-through, and transformative brands are serving it up by evolving traditional “S” approaches (philanthropic initiatives, etc) to tying social-impact outcomes to the success of the brand.
Spoiler alert: This is good for business, because consumers reward companies that walk their talk on these issues.
“As you start expanding and adding in other social components and bringing in environmental components and climate justice, all of a sudden you’ll have new opportunities and new solutions,” Wilhelm said. “So, we can flip it from ‘I don’t know how I’m going to do that’ to ‘look at this amazing opportunity.’”
Empower Co as taken a whole new approach to climate action by rewarding women for their contributions. In trying to solve the climate crisis, “what I find is that one of the most important cogs in the wheel is the ‘S’ part, the social impact part — particularly, that of women,” said Rachel Vestergaard, CEO and founder of Empower Co — whose W+ Standard is the first globally recognized framework and metric for measuring and monetizing women’s empowerment.
Empower Co looks at empowerment as an ecosystem: Women are empowered when they have the tools, resources, access and agency to make their own choices. This ecosystem invites corporations, governments and investors to support womens’ work and recognize its value. And that value, said Vestergaard, will pay its own way.
“What you’ll notice here is that there’s no philanthropy. We don’t need donations; we need you to value the contributions of women” and understand the myriad positive ripple effects that result from working to level the playing field for women around the world.
The panelists agreed that finding tangible ways to value the contributions of all that fall under “S” will pay for itself in both the short and near term.
Shaping responsible consumption in a shifting landscape
Today’s savvier consumers expect transparency from brands. At the same time, brands are balancing complex global supply chains, where clarity on the origins and footprint of raw materials can become clouded. On Tuesday morning, Herbal Essences shared how is is evolving decades of hair care leadership amidst shifting consumer and business landscapes. Joining the session was Herbal Essences’ partner, Kew Royal Botanic Gardens — a global plant-science institution committed to protecting biodiversity.
As consumer expectations have evolved, their tolerance for tradeoffs has decreased — ex: they increasingly have high expectations for clean, responsible ingredients.
“As we evolve, the importance of ingredients will continue to be front and center,” said John Scarchilli, Director of Brand and Scientific Communications at Procter & Gamble, parent company of Herbal Essences.
Kew has been working for 20 years to develop quality plant essences and verify their origin and that the material will support its intended use. They also ensure they’re responsibly derived — that transparency and chain of custody are maintained from plant to bottle.
As more and more key plant ingredients become threatened, ensuring these essential inputs continue to thrive becomes a central business model.
“In the effort to do that, we’re increasing the use of biodiversity,” explained Monique Simmonds OBE, BSc, PhD, Deputy Director of Science at Kew. “If we can have a greater diversity of plants being used in products like Herbal Essences, that can support the local communities that are looking after those [plants and habitat].”
This in turn prevents biodiverse lands from being deforested to make way for ranching or farming while still providing a source of income for people stewarding the land. Simmonds foresees an increase in diversification of plants used in consumer products — and with it, deeper partnerships with governments, growers and other partners to help protect biodiversity.
“Ingredients are going to continue to be front and center,” Scarchilli said. “Where they’re from, what they’re for, and how they’re sourced responsibly is moving to protect biodiversity all over the world.”
And no one brand or company can achieve this alone — which is where partnerships such as Herbal Essences-Kew’s come in.
“These programs work because they create value for all partners,” Scarchilli said. “Investing back into those communities helps to sustain the supply.”
In another Tuesday morning session, Jose Gorbea — Global Head of Brands and Sustainability Innovation at HP Graphic Arts — detailed HP’s partnerships with German label-maker LABEL!STEN and climate-action platform One Tribe to advance digital printing practices that not only reduce the environmental impacts associated with conventional printing but also create shared value.
For HP’s part, Gorbea described how the company is now using water-based inks that contain no hazardous air pollutants and meet stringent requirements for human health and the environment, and how the company’s corrugated packaging has now achieved Ecologo Certification.
LABEL!STEN CEO Frank Plechschmidt explained how personalization of product packaging — such as printing the faces of a brand’s supply-chain partners (for example, the farmers who grow your coffee) directly onto packaging — helps customers make an emotional connection to the people producing their product, while seeing how their purchasing choices can have a direct positive impact on the lives of farmers in the supply chain. Plechschmidt detailed a collaboration with HP in which they digitally printed coffee farmers’ faces on packaging for an Australian brand with local suppliers — the products with people’s pictures far outsold other versions of the packaging.
One Tribe CEO Ric Porteus then explained how his company of “nature fanatics” is building a set of tools and restoration projects that allow companies including HP, and their employees, to take direct action to help regenerate ecosystems. Their projects are created through partnerships with local indigenous tribes throughout the world and are typically focused on helping companies offset their Scope 3 emissions while restoring critical biodiversity.
Image credit: 
Image credit: 
Image credit: 
Image credit: 
Eric Block On Responsible Branding 
You must be logged in to post a comment.