The Ecological Mindset and Regenerative Design May 28, 2009

Sustainable business has come to be understood as the greening of one’s operations.  Typical strategies involve the purchasing department and facilities managers.  We buy recycled paper and offer employee incentives for taking non-car transportation or carpooling.  And if we are really committed, we mitigate the carbon of our energy use through a wind-energy offset program.  Yet the fundamentals of business stay the same.  The use of paper, energy, and plastic is still high, commutes still exist, and product lines and marketing are essentially the same, but with a few green touches.  These touches are good.  They are spawned from good intentions and truly lessen our environmental impact.  And while being less bad is admirable, it is simply not good enough.  Being less bad only postpones the breakdown of unsustainable systems for a later date.  If we aspire to be green as presently defined, we risk missing the opportunity, and necessity, to be ecological and regenerative.

An ecological mindset forms interdependent relationships with the immediate surrounding world.  It understands the limits that are in place, but also the opportunities for health and true sustainable enterprise.  Businesses need to create strategies in order to be accessible to workers, provide services and products that are for the local community, and develop products from materials that can be infinitely recycled and locally-sourced.  It follows that regenerative design creates products and services that actually work to restore ecosystems rather than break them down.  These products would be able to be broken down into nutrients to be used in natural or technical cycles, as written in “Cradle to Cradle” by McDonough and Braungart. Soil health would be built, carbon cleaned from the air, and water quality improved all as the result of the product of your business.  This revolutionary model makes a clean break from unsustainable business that is normative today.

Waxman-Markey Climate Bill Introduced in the House May 20, 2009

Economic recession, swine flu, and war in the Middle East dominate the headlines, but historic climate legislation is currently being introduced in the House’s Energy and Environment Subcommittee. The Waxman-Markey climate bill must pass through the subcommittee in order to get the opportunity to be passed through the Energy and Commerce Committee.

In general, it seems that the bill is much as you’d imagine – a good start, but not all that we hoped for. It has decent targets, a 20% less carbon from 2005 levels by 2020, 42% less by 2030, and 80% by 2050. Of its problems, one of the major ones is 2 billion tons of carbon offsets, a large number considering that U.S. green house gas emissions were 7.2 billion tons. Another important component of the bill is 15% of the cap-and-trade allowances will go to industries which are most likely to be negatively affected because of international competition. This wise measure protects vital metal, glass, chemical, and paper industries, to name a few.

This is an extremely important piece of legislation to closely follow as it moves through subcommittee and committee. It would invigorate an already robust and growing renewable energy market, change consumer behavior, and slow and minimize the drastic climatic changes we’re facing. It is also a timely piece of legislation, considering we are getting closer to the Copenhagen meetings as greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise. One of government’s roles is to make regulations to ensure the safety of the community when there is a market failure; this bill provides the framework for such action.

Green Finance Emerges on Wall Street May 15, 2009

As the global economic storm rages on, Wall Street executives and their city officials are discussing how to transform the US financial sector into an international hub for green finance and environmental commodities trading. Talks were sparked by news of a draft for energy and climate legislation recently unveiled by House Democrats Reps. Henry Waxman of California and Ed Markey of Massachusetts.

The cap and trade proposal has investors and analysts talking amongst themselves and measuring the prospects of the nation’s economic future. There are certainly provisions to be wary of, such as those concerning a federally mandated carbon market, which may make it difficult to find domestic offsets. Still, carbon offsets require low capital intensity and promise guaranteed returns. Not to mention, the Waxman-Markey proposal seems to offer the much needed confidence to many that Congress is poised to pass a bill that offers more business opportunities than costs.

As the city and state of New York are heavily dependent on the financial sector for revenue, it is hoping to position itself to capitalize on the potential federal opportunities. The commotion seems to be inspired not only by survival, but about helping the US shift toward national sustainability and keeping New York the financial capital of the world.

Indeed, the anticipation of a larger, federally regulated carbon market is the biggest driver behind the growing popularity of green finance, along with the support of the New York City Economic Development Corp. The notion that emissions trading and climate change related investments could potentially help revive Wall Street’s fortunes has corporations actively seeking how best to position New York’s financial community ahead of the game.

It appears the general advice is to stake a claim in the expanding US carbon market, now largely dominated by the voluntary Chicago Climate Exchange. New York has already missed out on the chance of becoming the center of market activity surrounding the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), the burgeoning cap-and-trade program involving ten Northeastern states and currently the nation’s only mandated carbon emissions trading scheme. A federal carbon market would dwarf RGGI and all other emissions trading initiatives.

Currently, most of the trading volume can be found at the Chicago Climate Exchange, Chicago Climate Futures Exchange, with some activity is growing at the Green Exchange (an initiative launched by the New York Mercantile Exchange). NYMEX’s Green Exchange is already a popular platform for trading in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide pollution permits, so carbon markets could abundantly grow there. It will be interesting to see where the momentum drives the trends and the future.

Cost-Free Strategies to Becoming Greener May 9, 2009

There are many changes an individual can make to become more environmentally friendly.  However, changes like switching to solar panels or buying a hybrid car costs money and may not be momentarily feasible for some people.  Nevertheless, an individual can become more environmentally friendly just by making simple cost-free strategies through minor lifestyle alterations that will save money and offset carbon.  We’ve listed some of these in other blogs, but it’s always good to have a reminder. Also – let us know which ones you’re doing and which ones you’d like to try out next. It’s always great to hear everyone’s progress – we’re all still learning!

• Unplug electronics, such as PC’s, TV’s, DVD’s, stereos, etc.  These consumer electronics are responsible for approximately 15% of household electricity use, even when on “off” or “standby” mode.  If you unplug such devices, you may save up to $10 a month on your utility bill (Per DoE.)  This may also offset your carbon by about 1000lbs. per year (Per World Resources Institute.)
• Practice temperature control with your heating, ventilation, air-conditioning (HVAC) system, especially for periods away from home.  Programming your thermostat to certain levels can save you about $180 in energy costs every year (Per Energy Star.)  These combined efforts can reduce your carbon emissions by 20% to 50% (Per DoE.)
• Adjust your current water heater to no more than 120 degrees, which is sufficient for most households.  Each 10 degrees reduces about 500lbs. of carbon per year (Per World Resources Institute.)
• Most washers’ energy consumption goes to water heating.  Washing two loads a week in warm or cold water will reduce emissions by about 500lbs. per year (Per World Resources Institute.)  Also, air dry your clothes to save energy otherwise used during machine drying.
• Run your dishwasher with a full load of dishes. Most of the energy used by a dishwasher goes to heat water.  Avoid using the heat-dry, rinse-hold and pre-rinse features. Instead use your dishwasher’s air-dry option (Per Energy Star.)
• Reduce the amount of energy your refrigerator uses by setting the temperature between 35 and 40 degrees Fahrenheit, while positioning it away from a heat source such as an oven, a dishwasher, or direct sunlight from a window.  Make sure the door seals are airtight and minimize the amount of time the refrigerator door is open (Per Energy Star.)
• Recycle products from paper to electronics.  Products made from recycled paper, glass, metal, and plastic reduce carbon emissions because they use less energy to manufacture than products made from completely new materials.  For instance, you will save two pounds of carbon for every 20 glass bottles that you recycle (Per Nature Conservancy.)  You will also save 17 trees by using 1 ton of recycled paper (Per World Resources Institute.)
• Take fast showers and turn off the faucet when brushing your teeth, washing your hair, lathering your hands with soap, washing dishes, or washing food. This could save up to 25 gallons of water per month (Per National Conservation Campaign.)
• If you eat meat, add one meatless meal a week. Meat costs a lot at the store-and it’s even more expensive when you consider the related environmental and health costs.
• Walk or bike instead of driving to add to your health benefits.   The effort would save energy costs and save one pound of carbon for every mile travelled (Per Nature Conservancy.)

For additional information and references visit:

• Energy Star
• National Conservation Campaign
• Nature’s Conservancy
• U.S.  Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
• World Resources Institute

Federal Stimulus Takes Water Issues Seriously May 1, 2009

Green jobs and energy have been given new life by the stimulus bill. While environmental issues took a backseat at the beginning of the recession, the stimulus spending has reawakened the sense that green jobs can create a sustainable economy and slow the rapid pace of climate change. For a variety of reasons, energy has dominated the conversation, but there are other important environmental provisions in the bill. Principal among these is another, though not nearly as talked about, of the world’s other major resource problem we’re facing: water. The spending portion of the stimulus bill provides for a whole range of problems surrounding water on a regional scale:

• $290 million for watershed and flood prevention activities
• $50 million for watershed rehabilitation
• $1.38 billion for rural water and waste disposal loans and grants
• $1 billion for Bureau of Reclamation Water and Related Resources treatment facilities

These programs, among other water and environmental cleanup measures, are being administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of the Interior, and Department of Agriculture.

The severe weather resulting from climate change, increasing population, demographic shifts, and agricultural stresses are creating problems for water availability (see the 3^rd UN World Water Development Report for more info). These problems are manifest in the US too, and this is reflected in stimulus package spending. As one of the most basic of human needs and one of the most dangerous weather threats, it will create jobs to build, staff, and maintain water treatment plants, enact flood prevention measures, and clean up, replant, and landscape for the ecological restoration of watersheds. While these efforts don’t have the commercial appeal of renewable energy, they are nonetheless just as essential for the environment, economy, and long-range viability of our communities.