Greenience

Note to Suppliers: Manage carbon, or lose customers

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:24:00 +0000

Very interesting post today on Environmental Leader. Here's a highlight:

To assemble the report, 44 CDP member firms reached out to 1,402 of their suppliers. About 51 percent of suppliers responded to the survey, 7 percent declined to participate and another 42 percent did not respond.

That's huge. SEVEN PERCENT DECLINED and FORTY-TWO PERCENT DID NOT RESPOND. 700 companies either did not have the time, resources or requisite knowledge to respond to a request by some of the largest companies in the world with regard to their carbon management practices.

Eco-Catalyst: A Capital Idea

noreply@blogger.com (Tanya Lehmann) — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:21:00 +0000

As I've been combing thru articles and skimming books that I'd like to spend much more time absorbing, I have recently come to this: the answer to sustainability is in true cost accounting. Well, at least if we approach it from that perspective and with that goal in mind – the ability to understand, acknowledge, and account for all the forms of capital responsible for our success, for our very existence – we will be able to achieve a level of sustainability.

This means we must rethink our current values and business practices, even our living practices. It means we must adjust to our new state of being, just as the industrial revolution and conventional capitalism were a response to the state of being in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. And isn’t it about time? Our new state of being requires that we understand our interdependence with natural capital and its limits (and therefore our own) within a global setting. We must change the fact that our current definition of economic growth does not adequately account for the cost of natural capital and values all expenditures based on $s spent regardless of whether society benefits or loses, whether the cause and effect are positive or negative. Too often the effect of consuming natural capital and the waste that is deposited into the ecosystem as part of that consumption, are not accounted for.

The challenge is large, but begins with some very attainable steps and goals:

Employ Systems Thinking

assess entire system of your business: inputs & outputs (as well as their source and destination), resources, waste, available technologies
establish value for resources that can't always be expressed in $s (human and natural capital)

Engage All Stakeholders

identify all stakeholders and understand their role within your ecosystem
apply systematic ways to capture and act on stakeholder input, feedback, and ideas
employ strategies to address stakeholder concerns
establish new systems of recognition and reward

Enable Innovation

collaborate internally & externally
partner with other businesses to expand your joint capabilities
consider all ideas, however radical or simple
look for quick wins, but make sustainability a long-term commitment

To survive - and ultimately to thrive - in the coming years and generations, we must address the need to redefine cost and value to include natural capital in our evaluation of 'growth', progress, and prosperity.

Influences for this post include:
Natural Capitalism, Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins, L. Hunter Lovins
Presentation by Jeffrey Hollender, CEO of Seventh Generation, at the University of Denver on 11/09/2009

Corporate Sustainability, Workforce Planning and HR Strategy

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:03:00 +0000

The information within this post is a direct result of a conversation Tanya and I had with Seema Iyer - Workforce Planning Strategist. Seema has an amazing background serving in key strategic HR and Global Workforce Planning roles at both Sun Microsystems and HP. The goal of our conversation was to delve into the HR Drivers of Corporate Sustainability.

The first part of our discussion centered around where HR Drivers of Corporate Sustainability fit into Maslow's Hierarchy. This is a very interesting concept, which frankly requires additional thought in order to fully flesh out the mapping. At this point, I'm setting aside the Maslow mapping. Here's a more general hierarchy of some of the benefits of Corporate Sustainability:

Employee Satisfaction and Attraction / Retention....

Risk Management / 'Exceeding' Compliance Requirements.....

Improving Revenue (top-line growth)......................................

Operating Costs, Tax Implications (expense reduction).............................

Regulatory Compliance............................................................................

I know what you're probably thinking. "Wait, the only 'HR item' in the hierarchy is at the very top!" And you'd be correct. That was Seema's position right from the start - the HR Drivers of Corporate Sustainability are realized only after several other key benefits are achieved.

CONCLUSION #1: Corporate Sustainability can have a very real impact on driving benefits in the HR realm, but there are a lot of 'foundational elements' that need to be covered before these HR benefits can truly be realized.

The next part of our discussion centered on the Executive-level HR-related KPIs where Corporate Sustainability has an impact. Here's a high-level summary of what we came up with:

Executive-level KPIs:

Employee Satisfaction

Mapping Sustainability to Specific Dimensions of the 'Great Place to Work' Survey

Credibility
Respect
Fairness
Pride
Camaraderie

Attraction of talent from top universities

Executives present at top universities and engage students in dialog
Students form opinions of company based largely on these interactions
Students are looking for companies that operate in a sustainable manner and that take Corporate Responsibility seriously
Not having a clear, strong message around Sustainability and CR is seen as a large weakness by students

Less Important: Retention (unless voluntary turnover is in double-digits it's not a focus area)

If voluntary turnover is in double-digits it's more likely due to management culture and nature of work

CONCLUSION #2: Corporate Sustainability has a major impact on attracting talent from top universities.

Off the Cuff: How Education Plays Into It

noreply@blogger.com (Tanya Lehmann) — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 12:48:00 +0000

What better place to focus sustainability efforts than schools. It’s where we learn new ways of thinking, new behaviors, and have the opportunity to explore, research, and innovate. Our experiences permeate how we act in our homes (both backwards to the homes we are leaving and forwards to the homes we have yet to create), what we bring to our jobs, and how we impact our world. Some new reports on how our schools are performing and what they’re up to in the sustainability arena are worth checking out:

College Sustainability Report Card 2010 http://tiny.cc/K7d6D
Net Impact's 2009 Business As UNusual guide http://tiny.cc/DDga5

Green Recovery - Getting Lean - Travel Less: Telecommuting

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:26:00 +0000

In his new book, 'Green Recovery', Andrew Winston espouses 'Getting Lean' as a cornerstone strategy for companies looking to emerge from the economic downturn as a more sustainable entity. As Winston states: “Get Lean on Stuff, Not People.” According to 'Green Recovery', one of the four pillars of 'Getting Lean' is “Travel Less: Telecommuting and Teleconferencing”. In the book, Winston references the telecommuting successes of Sun Microsystems, stating the following benefits:

In 2007, Sun downsized its office space by 15%, avoiding $64M in real estate costs
Home-based employees were working three more hours per week than office-based employees
The total energy footprint for home-based employees was down more than 5,000 kilowatt-hours per year
Home-based employees were happier, in part due to the avoidance of 80 hours of commute time and $1,700 in gas and wear and tear on their cars

And now, the rest of the story... No, the rest of the story isn't some ugly exposé on the inaccuracy of the information. The fact is that there is actually a lot MORE positive information that 'Green Recovery' understandably wasn't able to delve into. And how do I know this? I know this because it was my job. At that time I was Principal Program Manager of Eco-Responsibility at Sun.

Here's the step-by-step breakdown:

> We understood that many of the benefits of telecommuting had long been touted, but never quantified in a systematic, reliable manner.

> We wanted to deliver this quantification at both the individual employee level – to personalize the benefits of telecommuting, as well as at the corporate level – to include in our inaugural CSR report.

> We developed a strategy for capturing the relevant data which included: actual employee commute behaviors; 'baseline' and 'post' measures of various dimensions of employee satisfaction; and 'baseline' and 'post' measures related to eco-awareness and the eco-impacts of telecommuting.

> Teletrips (www.teletrips.com) was selected as our commute tracking technology partner. The Teletrips solution provided a very easy-to-use interface for our participants to enter their profile information, which included the distance they lived from their primary work location and satellite work locations, as well as their vehicle make and model which was used to input fuel efficiency data from an EPA database.

> I developed a survey to capture data on employee satisfaction and eco-awareness.

> The baseline survey was administered prior to the launch of the commute tracking training. From the baseline survey, 55% of the responses fell below the previous year's Employee Satisfaction level.

> The commute tracking training also included educational content focused on raising the eco-awareness of the participants.

> Our tracking participants entered their actual commute behavior into the Teletrips tracking tool and in turn received a weekly report that detailed their actual savings in terms of time, direct and indirect costs, and GHG emissions avoidance. On the backend, I received reports with the same information in aggregate.

> As part of the program, I published a bi-weekly briefing that illustrated the aggregate-to-date metrics, along with additional educational information focused on building eco-awareness.

> I administered the 'post' survey at the close of the commute tracking program. From the 'post' survey, 100% of the responses were above the previous year's Employee Satisfaction level (an increase of 45% over the baseline results). One item was of particular interest. The percentage of favorable responses to the survey item “I would recommend Sun because of the environmental benefits associated with the OpenWork program.” jumped from 68% to 85%. (Note: OpenWork is the overall program, of which telecommuting is a large component.)

> Across the entire survey – the total percentage of favorable ratings increased from 73% to 89%.

> After the close of the commute tracking pilot, I took the data we had captured and extrapolated it across our employee population to determine the net impact at the corporate level. In truth, prior to the extrapolation, I actually removed a couple of outliers from our data capture. These outliers were telecommuters who lived more than 90 miles from their primary office and they significantly skewed the results in a positive manner, but we elected to remove them in order to report the impacts in a more conservative manner.

> One other conservative aspect of our CSR report data – we 'backed out' energy used by employees while working from home. For the 2006 report, I developed a model of the typical home office setup and factored in assumptions such as employees spending more on heating or cooling as a result of not setting their programmable thermostats up or down by two degrees during the day. The resulting output of my model showed that the average energy use of an employee working from home was 52% of their energy use in the office. For the 2007 CSR report, a colleague ran a study to monitor and quantify the 'at home' energy usage profile. The result of this study showed that the average energy use of an employee working from home was 51% of their energy use in the office.

> One final interesting takeaway: based on anecdotal data, employees on average 'gave back' 50% of their avoided commute time, which for Sun meant the equivalent of over 100 FTEs worth of productivity 'reinvested' into the company.

As for teleconferencing...I'll save that for another post. But as a teaser, don't believe for one minute that you need to invest $250K per site for a quality high-definition solution. Would you believe 10% of that?!

Eco-Catalyst: The Sustainability Index – It’s not the work of just one

noreply@blogger.com (Tanya Lehmann) — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:11:00 +0000

Even if (or perhaps especially when) it’s a giant like Walmart. The name Walmart does not usually fall lightly in my presence and generally evokes a strong response. Realizing the potential the largest retailer has to influence the awareness and actions of so many – suppliers and consumers alike – I’m attempting to approach the Sustainability Index spawned by Walmart with a positive outlook.

The Sustainability Index, as Walmart will happily admit, is not meant to be specific to one retailer, one industry, one market segment. It is for all and to be owned by all. So many organizations have already made tremendous strides in this arena and will have much to contribute. And that’s a good thing, because in looking at the extent and content of their sustainability reporting as well as the somewhat lacking ‘15 Questions for Suppliers’, Walmart could use some help. The work is not trivial and will take years to develop. The Sustainability Consortium and organizations like the World Resources Institute will help create a consistent framework for companies to report and consumers to understand the sustainability of their products.

If Walmart is truly serious, this is a huge opportunity. They must be committed, however, and not only at the expense of others. They must be willing to work in partnership with their suppliers rather than just making a lot of demands. They need to understand and communicate the full depth of their slogan - “Save Money, Live Better” - so that it includes not just $s, but environmental and social costs and benefits as well.

They won't be serious unless we're serious. It is up to all of us. If you shop at Walmart and they are profiting from your purchases, you can demand better quality, more choices, and a reduced footprint. As a consumer, you will be able to make more informed choices. If you supply to Walmart and they are profiting from your products, you can demand that they share in the effort to bring sustainable products to market and recognize as well as communicate the benefits. As a supplier you can leverage this collaborative challenge as an opportunity to improve your products and increase your value.

Whether something termed a ‘super-center’ can ever be considered sustainable, is up for serious debate. In the meantime, the Sustainability Index initiative will bring us closer to a clearer understanding of:

what we are spending (and in turn saving) - as much in terms of less visible resources like water, energy, and fair labor as out-of-pocket $s, and
how it will better our lives - not only by immediate gratification thru use or perceived status, but also long-term waste reduction, improved health, and a thriving ecosystem.

Regardless of how I might feel about Walmart, that's a good thing.

Eco-Catalyst: Drive to Survive, Strive to Thrive

noreply@blogger.com (Tanya Lehmann) — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 07:46:00 +0000

I'm somewhat of a newcomer to the term thrivability, but I understand it is beginning to replace sustainability in some circles. I heard it at a recent meet-up event focused on social responsibility, so I decided to give it some thought. It appears to be a question of degrees and/or extent of progress.

Sustainability is about survival. It’s about equalizing what is now very clearly an off-balance relationship between availability of resources and their rate of consumption. To reach sustainability, we must reduce consumption and waste while increasing the rate of renewal to the point where they are equal.

Thrivability goes beyond that to create a world where the scale is tilted in the opposite direction and we are renewing more than we are consuming. In a thriving society, there is no such thing as waste. Not only will the act of consumption always produce new resources, but we will also have offset the damage of our previous consumption habits.

As I see it, if we can't at least reach sustainability, then thrivability will also be out of reach. So, taking the approach of setting repeatable and attainable goals of sustainability - Drive to Survive - while still pursuing the aspiration of thrivability - Strive to Thrive - seems to be a good course of action.

These concepts aren’t new, but they are emerging in new ways and on new frontiers. Perhaps if we use the Stockdale Paradox as quoted in Good to Great as our guide, we will achieve sustainability and evolve into a thrivable society.

- Tanya Lehmann, The Eco-Catalyst

Thinking Out Loud: VP of Sustainability and Public Relations?

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 14:12:00 +0000

I've seen this now in more than one company - one executive responsible for both Sustainability AND Public Relations. One of the companies is a Fortune 100 company.

Frankly, I don't get it. I'm sure it's possible to make this work. But isn't it oxymoronic that just having the two roles combined reeks of greenwashing - and thus bad PR?!

Eco-Pragmatist: 5 Steps to Getting Started with Corporate Sustainability Reporting

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 16:15:00 +0000

Companies of many different sizes, in many different industries, are engaging in Corporate Sustainability Reporting. The level of reporting runs the gamut from a single web page outlining sustainable business practices, to formal G3 Application Level A+ GRI Reports. For many companies, there is a fundamental question that is tripping them up: "Where do we start?".

If your company is stuck at "Where do we start?", here's your answer: "Start ANYWHERE!"

While certainly valuable, it's not even necessary to have a clearly articulated Sustainability Strategy - you can work on that either along with your initial CSR Reporting effort - or use your CSR Reporting initiative as 'pre-work' for developing your Sustainability Strategy.

Here's a list of five steps to get you started on 'starting anywhere':

Ideally, engage the right stakeholders from across the company. Who are the 'right stakeholders'? Start with the ENTIRE executive level team - ALL areas of your business are part of this. If for some reason you're unable to accomplish this - you've clearly got some education and awareness building to work on, but don't let that stop you. Proceed with the stakeholders you are able to bring to the table. It's not uncommon for a company's initial reporting to come from just one or two functions - most typically Environment, Health & Safety and/or Facilities. Again, while it's the 'getting started' that's most important - it's equally important to continue to work on engaging any lagging stakeholders.
While there are specific reporting guidelines available from more than one source, it doesn't really matter - you can literally spend less than an hour brainstorming the areas of your business and relevant items to include in your initial reporting. If even that sounds intimidating - here's an accelerator: What are your different sources of energy usage?
It's OK that you don't have all the answers - here are some considerations for handling 'not having the answers':

It's acceptable to state in your reporting that you don't have the answers,
You can state that the goal for your next report is to work toward finding the answers,
Start working to identify the various sources of data you require,
Compile your data and structure your report in a way that makes sense to your organization (you can utilize frameworks such as the Global Reporting Initiative to help)

Publish your initial findings online - they will serve as a launching point for your continuing focus. Publish a single web page if that's all the content you have. You don't need to build out an entire 'subsite' devoted to your CSR Reporting (although many larger companies are doing just that). You can also compile a more formal 'printable' report and provide it as a PDF download on your company website. Whatever you do, DON'T publish a printed version of your CSR Report (it's very poor CSR etiquette).
Go back to Step 1 and repeat. Now you'll have a baseline to drive the stakeholder discussions.

Now schedule that initial stakeholder meeting and get the ball rolling!

- Randy Hale, The Eco-Pragmatist

It's all about YOU.

noreply@blogger.com (Tanya Lehmann) — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:05:00 +0000

If you haven't noticed, sustainability is all about YOU. If you aren't getting engaged, motivated, or inspired, you're not paying attention. The messages are out there. They can be confusing at times, but sometimes they're pretty simple. For example, one company’s latest fair trade coffee advertising is pretty good. A simple message printed on some of their cups promoting the effect that YOU, their consumer, is having on their goal to purchase 100% fair trade coffee. They're giving you credit for making it happen. That type of messaging creates awareness and has the potential to generate an emotional response to drive behavioral change.

It's showing up in business too. YOU as part of the collective that makes a difference in the workplace and is a company's most important asset, can influence sustainability. Beyond individual workplace initiatives (which can be very effective), businesses - as consumers - are demanding more of their suppliers to ensure that they are receiving sustainable goods and services. It's not just about feeling better that we're doing something for the environment or our fellow man, it's also about ensuring that these goods and services will continue to be available and cost effective – i.e. can be sustained/renewed over time.

The choices YOU make on a daily basis are some of the most powerful influences on the road to sustainability. We must strive to relay that message and its benefits to everyone, every day.

Eco-Catalyst: What's in a Name?

noreply@blogger.com (Tanya Lehmann) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 08:48:00 +0000

In my research on how companies are changing their annual reports to encompass more than just the economic aspects of corporate sustainability, I've encountered several different names: Sustainability Report, Responsibility Report, and Stewardship Report. With an increasing emphasis and desire within businesses to demonstrate their awareness and participation in activities that are environmentally, socially, and economically conscious, many struggle to get their heads around what that means and how best to label it. Myself, I prefer action words and since sustainability easily returns back to its verb form of to sustain, I'll stick with that one.

Whether you call it sustainability, responsibility or stewardship, the principles are generally the same. They center on the premise that we have not inherited the earth from our parents, but rather borrowed it from our children. (Quote often attributed to Antoine de Saint-Exupery, the author of The Little Prince and other works.) The use of the word "borrow" implies that we shall return what we've borrowed in an uncompromised state for future generations to enjoy. The emphasis on the future, rather than the past, means we need to envision new ideas and practices based on our aspirations rather than our accomplishments.

It begins with seeing sustainability not as a burden but as opportunity for new innovation that will make your company stronger and better fit for future growth. This may mean extending your value chain to include suppliers, consumers, and competitors and adopting new business models.

It continues with the incorporation of a sustainable mindset into all parts of the organization. Every product, every service, every role and position will play a part and have an impact on the sustainability of the organization. This will mean actively engaging stakeholders across the value chain and evaluating progress incrementally to promote continuous adaptation without losing sight of the aspiration that inspired you.

It never ends. It is a perpetual cycle that will evolve intentional green activities into instinctual sustainable behavior.

A good source of further information on sustainability and what it can mean for your organization is Harvard Business Review's Why Sustainability Is Now the Key Driver of Innovation.

So, regardless of what name or label you apply, the important thing is to practice sustainability every day.

~ by Tanya Lehmann, the Eco-Catalyst

Reaction: Time Magazine "Eco-Buyer Beware" article

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:58:00 +0000

I take exception with one of the statements that Bryan Walsh makes in the new Time magazine article: Eco-Buyer Beware: Green Can Be Deceiving

I emailed the following comment to Bryan regarding his description of the new Greenwashing Index site:

I don't believe a '1' is a 'little green lie' - according to the site a '1' is 'authentic'. By calling it a 'little green lie' you're implying that NONE of the claims can ever be completely accurate!

It's disappointing that the Time site does not support comments or discussion for articles!

Intelligent Business and Carbon Footprint Reduction

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:24:00 +0000

For me, it's not about the politics, or even really about climate change. It's about the fundamental economics. Non-renewable energy sources are a scarce resource subject to the basic laws of supply and demand. The more reliant a business is on a scarce resource, the more risk to the business when price fluctuations hit. The price of oil was really putting the hurt on businesses when the recession hit. The recession then caused a drop in demand which dropped the price of oil back to more 'acceptable' levels. It also caused a drop in supply as production decreased. When the recovery revs up to full strength, we're going to see the price of oil spike again and businesses that didn't take the steps to mitigate that risk are going to have a tough time surviving 'Round Two'.

The Eco-Pragmatist: 5 Steps to Promote and Leverage Grassroot Efforts

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 15:51:00 +0000

In the drive toward developing more sustainable business practices, many companies are leveraging internal, grassroot efforts. However, many MORE companies are not - and they are missing out on a major opportunity. The desire and energy is there. Today. Inside your company. So how do you harness it? Here are five steps to take:

Leverage an existing venue, such as an Employee Council Meeting - OR create a new venue, such as a brown bag lunch session.
Promote the initiative with open, transparent communication from Senior Leadership on why it's happening - part of the why SHOULD be to help develop more sustainable business practices. This communication should touch on a definition of sustainable business practices to make sure the general context is set.
Build awareness in more depth around sustainable business practices and why they are important from the organizational to the individual level.
Brainstorm. Provide a framework for the brainstorming - or don't. There are no wrong answers in brainstorming, and for these grassroot sessions there's really not a wrong way of facilitating it. Ideally, when brainstorming is complete, the group should attempt to map the various options against two scales: 1) How tightly does it align with organizational strategic goals, and 2) How 'individually actionable' is it. The items ranking high on both dimensions are your 'low hanging fruit'.
Incent the right behaviors. Intrinsic rewards are going to be most effective here - it's all about recognition: company newsletter, email from leadership, and/or a personal 'nice job' from the CEO.

- by Randy Hale, The Eco-Pragmatist

How Basic Is It?

noreply@blogger.com (Tanya Lehmann) — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:04:00 +0000

So, this morning I challenged myself to think about how my previous post on reducing consumption, waste and impact goes "beyond the basics" as our tagline suggests. Here's what I came up with...

At its core, the act of reducing consumption and waste is pretty basic. And yet, as scientific research suggests, it takes up to 10000 repetitions to make a behavior 2nd nature to us. Blue box recycling containers were first introduced in the 1980s - I still remember getting ours. (I remember getting - and using - our first CFL coupons in the same general timeframe.) And yet, decades later we are still struggling to provide adequate services and opportunities to enable recycling as an everyday and anytime/everywhere practice.

A recent article in the Washington Post (http://loudounextra.washingtonpost.com/news/2009/mar/14/trashed-economy-foretold/) cites evidence at local landfills that indicate we are, in fact, significantly reducing waste by limiting new purchases and finding ways to reuse existing products. It also suggests that the primary motivator is the economic downturn. Our job is to ensure that these behavior patterns are not simply a temporary reaction to an outside influence, such as a harsh economy, but rather a natural response that is sustainable far into the future. I don't claim to have all the answers, but I'm asking questions and am inspired by the actions of so many, individuals and businesses alike, who are "going beyond the basics" to make a true and lasting difference.

Eco-Catalyst: reduce, reduce, reduce

noreply@blogger.com (Tanya Lehmann) — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 06:08:00 +0000

Sometimes the best use is no use at all.
Let’s face it – we’re a nation of consumers. We have taken the abundance of our resources for granted far too long. And still, it heartens me to know that the cry to Reduce, Reuse, Recycle has never been stronger. This was evident to me as I participated in the first annual Green Festival here in Denver, CO May 2nd and 3rd of this year. The event drew over 23,000 participants and 94% of all show waste was diverted from the landfill.
(More at http://www.greenfestivals.org/denver/event-updates/denver)

But we have a long way to go. Few people realize that while the words Reduce, Reuse, Recycle are depicted as circular and continuous steps, the most effective in lowering the impact of our actions on the environment is reduce.

So, how can businesses contribute?

Reduce consumption
One obvious target is lighting. By retrofitting the lighting in five of its distribution centers to use energy-efficient, brighter, and motion-activated bulbs and fixtures, Limited Brands, Inc expects to save $775,000 annually and has improved working conditions for their associates. (More at http://www.genewscenter.com/content/Detail.asp?ReleaseID=7037&NewsAreaID=2)

Managing how IT systems are deployed and maintained (from data center to desktop) can also be a major opportunity for reduced consumption. One example is the recent implementation of a patented cold-aisle containment system in Yahoo datacenters, lowering their Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE) numbers to competitive levels.
(More at http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/06/24/yahoos-unstealths-its-data-center-efficiency/)

Not all reduction efforts need to be this extensive. Businesses can start at any level to make small changes such as turning off lights when not in use and installing energy efficient office equipment.

Reduce waste
We have all seen the ‘consider the environment’ tagline on emails to discourage the irresponsible use of paper at the office. I can’t tell you how many times I have witnessed the disposal of hand-outs the moment a meeting is adjourned. What a waste! If you must print, consider printing only essential pages and printing on both sides of the paper. Paper products can contribute as much as 1/3 of all office waste. This, of course also includes the products used in the kitchen, which might easily be replaced by reusable products such as mugs for drinking your morning coffee.
(Some good tips/info available at http://www.reduce.org/)

Discarded ink and toner cartridges generate 40 million pounds of unnecessary waste annually. According to true green @work – 100 ways to make the environment your business, if properly procured, “there’s no good reason a cartridge can’t be reused up to four times.”

Reduce impact
The net effect of reducing consumption and waste is a reduced impact on our environment. Many consider reductions and efficiencies in the way we use our resources – energy, water, etc – to be the single, most effective course for addressing current environmental sustainability issues.

While we have seen changes over the last year, driven largely by the economic downturn, let’s not let the amount of green in our wallets be the only catalyst to greening our world.

Thinking Out Loud: "Green Initiatives"

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:30:00 +0000

Prior to 'going green', companies have focused 'business initiatives' aimed at improving various critical business functions.

Company starts 'going green', now they have 'green initiatives'.

Company matures, gains deeper understanding of sustainability, now they have 'sustainability initiatives'.

Company matures yet again, sustainability now is core to the way they operate, now they have 'business initiatives' - sustainability is 'baked in'.

Why not a greener choice?

noreply@blogger.com (Tanya Lehmann) — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:18:00 +0000

Yes, it's true. I've been known to have a very vocal response to everyday experiences that stretch the boundaries of my eco-tolerance. This sometimes manifests itself in what some might consider a rant, but what I hope serves as a catalyst to get myself and others thinking and acting in more green ways. Today it was the unavailability of eco-friendly business card stock on the shelves of a popular office supply store. To their credit, they did offer an option to have cards custom-printed on recycled paper, but in quantities and on a timeline that did not meet my needs.

Now, that alone may not be cause for a rant, but it is the larger observation that these types of goods are not yet commonplace which spawned the reaction. While recycled content products are more prevalent than ever before, they are sometimes still completely absent as a choice or the selection is very sparse. As we encourage more people to recycle – whether at work or at home – we also need to encourage them to think beyond that one step in the larger cycle of sustainability. Where do the products we use come from and how are they produced? Where do the products go that we discard in the recycle bin? How do they re-appear as new and eco-friendly purchasing options? And if we do not see them re-appear then we must ask: Why not?

I believe people will actually make the greener choice, if presented with the choice and the opportunity to understand the choice.

The Eco-Pragmatist: Why should your company track its carbon footprint?

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 19:30:00 +0000

First off, this post assumes the reader has a basic understanding of what constitutes a corporate carbon footprint. But just to be safe - at a high-level - a corporate carbon footprint consists of two primary categories:

Direct emissions from sources owned or controlled by your company -- such as emissions from company manufacturing facilities, operational processes and company vehicles.
Indirect emissions that are the result of company activities, but from sources not directly owned by the company -- such as emissions attributed to purchased energy, outsourced activities, employee travel, and emissions resulting from the use of company products.

So why measure your corporate carbon footprint?

There are some very compelling reasons from a pure bottom-line impact perspective:

The carbon your company burns costs money! For all the momentum the carbon footprint management imperative has, the basic fact that it is another way of viewing company expenses is often over-looked or glossed over.
It provides an alternate, more holistic view of company expenses. By viewing expenses through the carbon footprint lense, you have the ability to spot inefficiencies within your business - from suppliers, to operations, to sales & distribution. Carbon footprint metrics will shine a different light on your overall cost structure.
Carbon footprint management helps drive goal alignment throughout your organization, providing different areas of the business with a common objective. One caveat applies here - it is imperative to have proper oversight and emphasis on the corporate level goal. Incent business units to collaborate to produce the largest benefit to the corporate entity, not just their silo.
Increased employee engagement. Employees are weary of the constant emphasis on cost-cutting. But a TRUE shift towards sustainability can significantly improve employee engagement by focusing on reducing the corporate carbon footprint. Another caveat - the focus on carbon footprint can NOT be a 'different spin on cost management' or 'greenwashing' without risking an opposite, negative effect on employee engagement.

There you have it - four great business reasons for managing your company's carbon footprint - and not one of them has anything to do with positively impacting people or planet.

Remember - the triple bottom line includes YOUR bottom line!

How in the world can one gallon of gasoline produce 19 POUNDS of CO2?

noreply@blogger.com (Randy Hale) — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 02:47:00 +0000

Some of the mass of the CO2 comes from oxygen in the atmosphere as a result of the combustion process.

The gasoline contributes the carbon (C), but the oxygen (O) comes from the air.

Carbon has a molecular weight of 12. One oxygen atom is 16.

The weight of a CO2 molecule is: C + O + O = 12 + 16 + 16 = 44.

To find the total amount of CO2 released per unit of Carbon, divide the total weight of a CO2 molecule by the weight of a Carbon atom:4 4/12 = 3.667

That means for every pound of carbon burned, there will be 3.667 pounds of CO2 gas released.

About 16% of the weight of a gallon of gas is hydrogen.

A gallon of gas weighs 6.6 pounds, the hydrogen in it weighs 1.1 pounds, and the carbon will weigh about 5.5 pounds.

If all 5.5 pounds of carbon turns into CO2 during combustion, the weight of the CO2 will be 20 pounds.

The weight of the oxygen used up will be about 14.5 pounds (3.667 lbs of oxygen per pound of carbon TIMES 5.5 lbs of carbon).

Memorize this and impress your friends!