Search

By Dr. Ram Nidumolu

As you go about developing or revising your strategies for making your business more sustainable, it is worth reviewing last year’s key developments in important areas of business strategy.

They will only grow in importance this year.

Rather than focus on particular stories ably summarized elsewhere, here are key strategic themes and the underlying research that you can use as practical guidance.

Core capabilities

Markets

Governance

Stakeholder management

Resource management

And that was the year for sustainable business strategies.

Dr. Ram Nidumolu is the founder and CEO of InnovaStrat, Inc., a US-based firm that provides sustainability advisory and research services to large corporations. He is a recognized thought leader and the lead author of the Harvard Business Review cover article, "Why Sustainability is Now the Key Driver of Innovation." He is currently completing a book on business and being-centered leadership that will be published by Berrett-Koehler later this year.

[Image credit: Shutterstock]

By Kevin Owyang

“Get to financial success first,” says Sonny Vu, CEO & Co-Founder of Misfit Wearables.  “If you build a culture that cares about its social purpose and its spiritual purpose on this earth,” you will realize the goals of social and environmental responsibility.  Vu is John Sculley’s latest brilliant partner, and creator of one of the Top 10 Gadgets of Consumer Electronics Show (CES) 2013.

Success follows Vu

Vu is a New Hampshire-based serial entrepreneur, but global companies like Toyota embrace his message.  His previous venture, AgaMatrix, created one of the first hardware medical devices that works with the iPhone and is heading towards $100 million in revenue.  Vu left as chairman about a year and a half ago to start Misfit Wearables and has since raised over $8 million in financing.

Misfit Wearables’ first product, the Shine, is an elegant, all-metal activity tracker that you can sync with your smartphone just by placing the device on the screen.   It can track cycling, swimming, walking, and running.

Purpose is different from profit

Vu says Misfit has two purposes.  The first is “to provide goods and services that enable communities to flourish.” That means, “you’re making stuff that’s really useful for people… and as a result you earn the financial and well-being rewards to flourish [yourself].”

The second is to “provide opportunities for people to express their innate capacity for productivity and creativity in meaningful ways.”   For Vu, this has deeper meaning.  “Does that mean job creation? Yes.  Does that mean making work meaningful? Absolutely.”

“Those two things are actually in our corporate charter at a very deep level and it’s actually repeated in every single [employment] offer at the very top.”  “It’s an employment offer agreement so it’s like the official thing you sign on to… it’s the first thing you see when you encounter the company.”

Servant leadership delivers results

“One of the most distinctive features about Misfit is servant leadership.   We believe that the customer is the leader.  And scientists, engineers, and designers serve the customer, or the user, first and foremost.”  “The team leads serve the engineers, designers, and scientists; I serve the team leads; and the board serves the company.  So when you look on our website, you don’t see leadership or management.”

And while Vu admits group dynamics are never perfect, “a servant’s heart exists across the organization” and that makes tension constructive and healthy when it could otherwise be difficult.

Meritocracy measured on cultural fit

Vu emphasizes “first and foremost is [corporate] culture. In fact, we will fire a person on a culture basis alone.  You know, we had one guy who was a superstar, very good at what he does, top of his field.  [He] was not a cultural match. And we let him go. It was a difficult thing to do but it was not a difficult decision to make.”

Is Vu onto something?  Steve Gandara, co-founder of ExcellentCultures, works at the highest level of global companies like Toyota’s Scion Division. He notes that cultural solutions are in demand because “the most recent Gallup Employee Engagement Survey tells us that 71 percent of employees are disengaged from work and ineffective leadership style is the primary cause.  What’s more, 70 percent of managers lead in a way that stimulates defensive behavior and destroys productivity and morale.”

What about the environment?

At this point, Misfit is not in production.  Yet, Vu notes that thoughtfulness is a core value. “Put away the dishes. Push in your chair after you get up from a meeting. It’s very subtle, but what is expressed internally will be expressed externally.”   And perhaps this is the basis for a sustainable supply chain that is thoughtful about the environment and workplace of companies that manufacture Misfit’s products.

Vu will be appearing at Digital Health Summit with Dr. Sanjay Gupta January 8-11 and CES2013, with Arianna Huffington and Deepak Chopra January 8, 2013.

*** 

Kevin Owyang is Founder of B Jibe.  B Jibe reports on people and companies that “Give Back”.  B Jibe is a not for profit project of Avolusis, LLC where Mr. Owyang is CEO.  Previously Mr. Owyang held various executive level positions in technology and telecommunications and was Executive Vice President, Risk Management at Kinder Morgan Inc.  You can read more about him here.

image: courtesy Misfit Wearables

At least part of the fiscal cliff deal, which people will no doubt be debating for weeks to come, was a boon to sustainable business—the extension of the wind power production tax credit (PTC).

The credit, which was included in a “tax extenders” package, will apply to all wind projects that begin construction in 2013. This is a departure from the original language which only targeted projects that began operation during the year in question. This effectively broadens the scope of the credit due to the long lead time involved in developing a wind farm.

The 2.2 cent per kWh credit will be applied for ten years of production for any project that qualifies within the one year extension window. The credit is expected to cost $12.1 billion over the next ten years.

There are presently about 75,000 people employed in the wind industry, which has factories or wind farms in all 50 states. The measure is expected to save some 37,000 jobs from the budget axe. In a post last summer, I spoke of a 91,000-job swing hanging on the outcome of the PTC renewal. That encompassed the 37,000 jobs expected to be lost, plus an additional 54,000 jobs expected to be added if the credit was extended for four years.

Since last night’s deal only extended the credit for one-year, there won’t be that many additional jobs created, though it’s not unreasonable to expect some gains.

Last year saw a record 44 percent of newly installed electric generation capacity take the form of wind turbines which substantially outpaced natural gas at 30 percent.

The wind industry, which involves some 500 manufacturers in the US, has become a force to be reckoned with in Washington. Many of the 2,000 companies that belong to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) sent delegations to the capital in the closing days of 2012, delivering hundreds of thousands of letters from constituents.

Given the lobbying clout of big oil and coal, it clearly takes fire to fight fire in today’s energy business. This is something outgoing AWEA CEO Denise Bode, a former lobbyist for the Independent Petroleum Association of America, knows all too well. Bode beefed up the AWEA staff after coming on-board, a move that appears to have paid off nicely.

Said Bode, upon hearing the news, "On behalf of all the people working in wind energy manufacturing facilities, their families, and all the communities that benefit, we thank President Obama and all the Members of the House and Senate who had the foresight to extend this successful policy, so wind projects can continue to be developed in 2013 and 2014.”

Colorado Senator Mark Udall had also lobbied hard for the extension, giving some 27 speeches in the senate on the subject. Udall clearly recognized the importance of wind power to Colorado’s economy. “Thanks to the PTC extension, I am confident the wind industry will be able to create jobs and help revitalize our American manufacturing sector,” Udall said.

Some, like Pete Maysmith, the Executive Director of Colorado Conservation Voters, felt that the one-year extension was insufficient.

“Without that extension, you were really going to see the wind industry grind to a halt or at least wind way down. And that’s not okay, because it’s a clean, non-polluting source of energy we need to power America. But we believe it should be more than one year. We can’t stop worrying about the PTC today, but we got a reprieve. Coloradans who are employed in the industry and who care about a clean energy future got a reprieve.”

Because of the last minute nature of the deal, as compared to the long term nature of wind power projects, there will have been some lost opportunities.

A statement from wind turbine manufacturer Vestas said, “Unfortunately, the late timing of the extension will result in a significant reduction in 2013 installations from previous years due to the time it takes from when an order is placed to project completion, the U.S. market will nonetheless be stronger as a result of the PTC extension.”

Also included in the fiscal cliff deal is a two-year extension for a 20% credit for advanced biofuels research. This extension is estimated to cost $14.3 billion. Energy-efficiency incentives for new and existing homes were also included in the bill.

[Image credit: Lsbentz: Flickr Creative Commons]

***

RP Siegel, PE, is an inventor, consultant and author. He co-wrote the eco-thriller Vapor Trails, the first in a series covering the human side of various sustainability issues including energy, food, and water in an exciting and entertaining format. Now available on Kindle.

Follow RP Siegel on Twitter.

By Kevin Owyang “The triple bottom line is ridiculous, I know it’s totally heretical to say that, but have you ever tried to build a business? Even just the financial bottom line is really, really hard.”

When I heard this, I thought I was listening to the echoes of a 1970’s era Clean Water Act opponent, but the words came from Sonny Vu, CEO & Co-Founder of Misfit Wearables and creator of one of the Top 10 Gadgets of Consumer Electronics Show (CES) 2013. He shared his thoughts with me during a recent interview.

“Get to financial success first,” says Vu. “If you build a culture that cares about its social purpose and its spiritual purpose on this earth,” you will realize the goals of social and environmental responsibility without “all the infrastructure and requirements that’s going to weigh you down.”

Success follows Vu

Vu is a New Hampshire-based serial entrepreneur, but global companies like Toyota embrace his message. His previous venture, AgaMatrix, created one of the first hardware medical devices that works with the iPhone. AgaMatrix is heading towards $100 million in revenue. Vu left as Chairman about a year and a half ago to start Misfit Wearables and has since raised over $8 million in financing.

Misfit Wearables’ first product, the Shine, is an elegant, all-metal activity tracker that you can sync with your smartphone just by placing the device on the screen. It can track cycling, swimming, walking, and running.

Purpose is different from profit

Vu says Misfit’s has two purposes. The first is “to provide goods and services that enable communities to flourish.” That means, “you’re making stuff that’s really useful for people… and as a result you earn the financial and well-being rewards to flourish [yourself].”

The second is to “provide opportunities for people to express their innate capacity for productivity and creativity in meaningful ways.” For Vu, this has deeper meaning. “Does that mean job creation? Yes. Does that mean making work meaningful? Absolutely...Those two things are actually in our corporate charter at a very deep level and it’s actually repeated in every single [employment] offer at the very top.”

Servant leadership delivers results

Vu has flipped the org chart upside down - putting customer needs at the top of the priority list. “One of the most distinctive features about Misfit is servant leadership. We believe that the customer is the leader. And scientists, engineers, and designers serve the customer, or the user, first and foremost.”

Then, the company is organized to address those customer needs best. Say Vu, “The team leads serve the engineers, designers, and scientists; I serve the team leads and the board serves the company. So when you look on our website, you don’t see leadership or management.”

And while Vu admits group dynamics are never perfect, “a servant’s heart exists across the organization,” and that makes tension constructive and healthy when it could otherwise be difficult.

Meritocracy measured on cultural fit

Vu emphasizes “first and foremost is [corporate] culture.” “In fact, we will fire a person on a culture basis alone. "You know, we've had people who were superstars, very good at what they do and on top of their field. They were not a cultural match. And we let them go. It was a difficult thing to do but it was not a difficult decision to make.”

Is Vu onto something? Steve Gandara, Co-Founder of ExcellentCultures works at the highest level of global companies like Toyota’s Scion Division. He notes that cultural solutions are in demand because “the most recent Gallup Employee Engagement Survey tells us that seventy-one percent of employees are disengaged from work and ineffective leadership style is the primary cause.

What’s more, seventy percent of managers lead in a way that stimulates defensive behavior and destroys productivity and morale.”

What about the environment?

At this point, Misfit is not in production. Yet, Vu notes that thoughtfulness is a core value. “Put away the dishes. Push in your chair after you get up from a meeting. It’s very subtle, but what is expressed internally will be expressed externally.” And perhaps this is the basis for a sustainable supply chain - thoughtful about the environment and workplaces where Misfit's products are manufactured.

Vu will be appearing at Digital Health Summit with Dr. Sanjay Gupta January 8-11 and CES2013, with Arianna Huffington and Deepak Chopra January 8, 2013

Kevin Owyang is Founder of B Jibe.  B Jibe reports on people and companies that give back.  B Jibe is a not for profit project of Avolusis, LLC where Mr. Owyang is CEO.  Previously Mr. Owyang held various executive level positions in technology and telecommunications and was Executive Vice President, Risk Management at Kinder Morgan Inc.  You can read more about him here.

By Cecilia Allen and the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives

The Flemish region of Belgium boasts the highest waste diversion rate in Europe. Almost three-fourths of the residential waste produced in the region is reused, recycled, or composted. Since the first Waste Decree was approved in Flanders in 1981, regional goals (for overall residential waste generation, separate collection, and residual waste after source separation and home composting) have been met and then exceeded, allowing more ambitious goals to be set in subsequent waste plans that are developed every four to five years. With these successes, the emphasis of waste management policies transitioned from disposal to source separation and recycling, and finally to waste prevention. Per capita waste generation in Flanders has held steady since 2000, showing a rare example of economic growth without increased waste generation.

The first plan for vegetable, fruit, and garden (VFG) waste, developed between 1991 and 1995, led to the creation of the non-profit Flemish compost organization, VLACO. VLACO encourages organic waste prevention, promotes composting at all levels, certifies compost, and operates as a reference and assistance entity on organic waste materials.

Organic materials are treated through composting and anaerobic digestion. In the beginning, there was one centralized compost plant that received mixed residential waste, but the compost quality was so bad that source separation was made a requirement in the regional plans for organic materials. The second plan for organic materials required separate collection of green waste (produced in public parks and areas as a result of pruning) or VFG waste, and advocated home composting. Subsequent organic materials plans have focused on promoting further home composting and cycle gardening, and encouraging businesses to compost.

By 2010, 35 compost plants in Flanders (8 for VFG waste and 27 for green waste) and 29 anaerobic digestion plants were processing organic residential waste together with manure and agricultural waste. Approximately 4,900 tons of organic materials were composted or treated through anaerobic digestion every day. VLACO estimated the energy savings and reduction in CO2 emissions resulting from compost production, compared to a scenario in which the organics were treated through incineration with energy recovery: in 2007, 480,000 fewer tons of CO2 were emitted due to separate collection and composting of 833,000 tons of organic materials.

The Flemish government mandates source separated collection throughout the region. In order to encourage improvements in separation, it also sets targets for per capita residential waste production, home composting, and maximum residuals, which must be met by all municipalities in the region.

In 1998, landfilling of unsorted waste, separated waste suitable for recovery, combustible waste, and all pharmaceuticals was banned, and incineration of separated recyclables and unsorted waste was also prohibited.In addition to incinerator and landfill restrictions, financial mechanisms are used to discourage burying and burning. There is an environmental tax for residual waste treatment that ranges from $9 per ton for incineration to $95 per ton for landfilling. In 2009, the revenues from these levies totaled $36 million.

One of Flanders’ central strategies to prevent waste goes to the root of the waste problem: the very design of products. To address this, the agency has created a set of tools to promote clean production and sustainable design. These include:

“ECOLIZER” – a tool for designers to estimate the environmental impact of products. It includes a set of indicators relating to materials, processing, transport, energy, and waste treatment, allowing designers to identify opportunities to reduce those impacts by changing the design.

Eco-efficiency assessment – a program to evaluate the efficiency of small and medium companies. It identifies points of intervention for reducing waste, improving energy and water efficiency, increasing recycling, and so on. The test is free of charge.

Inspirational online database – a collection of case studies of businesses that have implemented clean production and eco-design methods.

In 2008, $1.19 million in subsidies were given to reuse and recycling centers. In 2009, Flanders had over 110 second-hand shops employing a total of 3,861 employees and serving over 3.6 million paying customers. The government also organizes “Ecodesign awards” for students and professionals as a way to encourage innovations in waste prevention. The prizes range between $508 and $5,080.

Flemish waste legislation makes it mandatory for producers, importers, and retailers of certain items to take back waste products and meet collection and recovery targets. These obligations apply to batteries and accumulators, vehicles, printed matter, tires, electrical and electronic equipment, lubricating and industrial oils, lighting equipment, animal and vegetable fats and oils, and medicines. People can return broken or obsolete products to retailers free of charge. Producers are then responsible for management and treatment of the products according to specific requirements that include recovery targets. By law, new construction projects that generate over 1,000 m3 of debris must present a “deconstruction” plan and waste inventory and are responsible for recycling this waste. According to OVAM, 90 percent of construction and demolition waste—11 million tons—was recycled in 2010.

Waste Prevention Strategies Directed at Households and Individuals

Pay As You Throw (PAYT). The hallmark of this significant waste prevention strategy is the application of graduated taxes to different types of waste. Most expensive is the collection of residual waste, followed by the collection of organic materials, with the lowest taxes applied to plastic bottles, metal packaging, and drink cartons. Collection of paper and cardboard, glass bottles, and textiles is free. Tax on bulky waste varies depending on the quantity.

Home composting. Successful approaches to promote composting have included annual charges for the collection of organic materials ($51 for a 120 liter bin), educating citizens about home composting through communication campaigns, promoting “cycle gardening” to reuse yard waste, encouraging composting at schools, and composting demonstrations at community compost plants. An estimated 100,000 tons of organic materials were kept out of the collection and management system in 2008, thanks to home composting. In densely populated areas, the government encourages community compost plants, where citizens can take their organic materials. These facilities usually use compost bins, and so do not take up much space. By 2010, approximately 34 percent of the Flemish population—almost two million people—was composting at home.

Green event assessment and guide. Online tools are available for organizers to calculate the ecological footprint of their events and to prevent waste during events. The agency also maintains an online list of places that lend reusable tableware for events and parties. Additional waste prevention campaigns for citizens include promoting the use of tap water instead of bottled, encouraging bulk purchasing, discouraging the use of packaging and disposable bags, and providing “Please No Publicity” stickers distributed to citizens to reduce junk mail.

Regulating Products That Enter the Market

Although waste management is a local and regional responsibility, the Belgian federal government sets the standards for products that enter the market and eventually become waste. These policies include an Eco-tax Act for items like beverage containers, some packaging, and disposable cameras and batteries; a federal act that discourages producers from manufacturing items that increase waste problems or pose health or pollution risks; the adoption of standard labels for products meeting certain environmental and social criteria; and the publication of a green procurement guide.

Throughout Belgium, packaging is the producer’s responsibility. Nearly all the companies that produce household packaging are grouped in a single organization known as FOST Plus. Each participating company pays a fee based on the type and amount of packaging they are responsible for introducing into the market. The organization funds the public collection, sorting, and recycling of these materials. According to FOST Plus, the recycling rate for household packaging in Belgium has increased from 28 percent in 1995 to 91.5 percent in 2010.

Flanders accounts for 60 percent of the total household packaging recycled in the country (415,763 tons in 2010). FOST Plus estimates that compared to incineration, recycling prevented the emission of 860,000 tons of CO2. A 2006 study estimated that the total cost per inhabitant for the packaging management system in Belgium, accounting for income from recycling sales, was $7.34 per year.

By dividing responsibility appropriately between municipal, regional, and national governments, Flanders has successfully implemented a comprehensive strategy for waste prevention, recycling, and composting. The results speak for themselves: stable waste generation and the highest diversion rate in Europe.

Check out GAIA’s website here, download the full Zero Waste report here, and follow GAIA on Facebook and Twitter.

Read more from Other Worlds here, and follow us on Facebook and Twitter!

Copyright GAIA. You may reprint this article in whole or in part. Please credit any text or original research you use to GAIA.

[Image credit: City of York Council UK, Flickr]

This morning Avis announced that it will acquire car-sharing leader Zipcar for about $500 million. Avis will pay $12.25 per share of Zipcar stock in cash, or almost 50 percent over Zipcar’s closing price on December 31. The boards of both companies have already approved the transaction and the deal should close by spring of this year. Zipcar shareholders will score after months of flat performance, unless of course they bought at the IPO price of $18 or at the company’s peak share price of $31.50. The company was certainly a disruptor within the car rental business, but since its founding in 2000 Zipcar has had difficulty staying profitable.

The acquisition in part sends a signal that collaborative consumption, or the sharing economy, is here to stay, and that large companies are realizing that their businesses face competition from new models that no one even thought of just a few years ago. So is this really a sign that the sharing of goods and services is ready to scale, or is this just another big company swallowing competition to protect its turf?

Car-sharing has grown to a $400 million dollar business, with Zipcar setting the standard by its service, convenience and positioning of fleets at over 300 university campuses across the U.S. Other services such as Getaround and RelayRides have picked up on this bandwagon by going a step further (liability issues aside) and allowing car owners to rent out their own cars while they are idle at home or the office. Zipcar has claimed the car-sharing market will eventually be worth $10 billion in North America alone; with younger drivers eschewing the rush to get that driver’s license at 16 or 17, let alone preferring to share instead of owning a car, that trend is here to stay.

While the business press led by the Wall Street Journal welcomed the Avis-Zipcar acquisition, not everyone was enthusiastic. Washington Post writer Steven Pearlstein predicts that Zipcar will eventually disappear, that Avis will soon eviscerate its newest subsidiary, and called for the Department of Justice’s antitrust division to step in and halt the deal. But is it really in Avis’ best interest to sabotage a service with devoted customers? Gizmodo’s Peter Ha sees opportunity for Avis; Zipcar could score even more customers who would have access to more cars--including those precious vans coveted in New York for that weekend run to the Red Hook IKEA.

Avis’s executives, platitudes aside, would be wise to leverage the company’s capacity and boost Zipcar’s services. The sharing economy is only going to grow, not wither because some big guys and gals snap up new and innovative companies. Wiping out Zipcar would be a small step back, but consumers accustomed to sharing will find another way to avoid being shackled to auto companies or rental car companies. As Forbes contributor Tim Worstall explained, this deal could build value, not destroy a valued service because of the huge deals Avis gains when purchasing cars; consumer choice in this space could actually increase.

Leon Kaye, based in Fresno, California, is a sustainability consultant and the editor of GreenGoPost.com. He also contributes to Guardian Sustainable Business; his work has also appeared on Sustainable Brands, Inhabitat and Earth911. You can follow Leon and ask him questions on Twitter or Instagram (greengopost).

Image credit: Zipcar

By John Schulz, Director of Sustainability Operations at AT&T

In a given day, my cell phone plays the role of alarm clock, navigation system and personal assistant.  The next day it is my meteorologist and entertainment system. Oh, and I also use it to communicate with co-workers, business partners, friends and family.  It’s so thoroughly a part of my daily routine that I rarely stop to think about what makes it all work. Recently though, I’ve been looking into a resource that helps make it all work but is rarely, if ever, discussed. It’s water.

This idea of “embedded water” represents the sum of the water that is used in every step of a product’s life cycle. You usually hear about embedded water related to food and drink, and that is fairly intuitive because crops demand water, but there seems to be less public dialogue about the embedded water in other items we use each day like electronics and communications technologies.

In the case of my phone, there is embedded water in manufacturing it and delivering it. There is also embedded water in using it. How? Every time a phone – or any other device – connects to a network that signal flows through a complex maze of equipment that is housed in a diverse collection of facilities. These facilities house the equipment that makes the 21st century digital economy and lifestyle possible, but the equipment demands electricity to run and throws off substantial heat in the process.  It’s critical to keep the equipment cool, and the mechanical gear used to accomplish that climate control frequently uses water. My colleague Tim Fleming, Senior Energy Manager, explains the link between building cooling and water in this video. In fact, the EPA estimates that a full quarter of the daily water of U.S. buildings is used by cooling systems.

To address this challenge, AT&T and Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) joined forces. To start reducing the water used in AT&T’s operations, and thus the water embedded in using our phones and network, AT&T and EDF are running cooling efficiency pilots to identify best practices in three categories: better water treatment technologies, improved operational practices and increased use of “free air” cooling. Our hope is that we will identify concrete ways to reduce AT&T’s 3.4 billion gallon water footprint, and announce the results of our pilot in early 2013. We anticipate finding ways to save millions of gallons of water per year for AT&T, and potentially billions of gallons if the solutions are adopted by other industries.

Understanding and reducing the water embedded in products and services is one of the keys to the future of water management. We are looking forward to adding to the understanding of embedded water as we share the results of our pilots. The great part about this effort is that there are so many buildings that use water in their cooling process, and they’ll all be able to utilize the techniques and tools we uncover during our work with EDF. And that’s what this is really all about: reducing the water used to cool the buildings in which we live and work every day, helping us to be as efficient as possible with the amount of “embedded water” in our lives.

[image credit: Peter Kemmer: Flickr cc]

Tesla has announced the opening of three new Supercharger stations on the east coast. Located in Newark, DE and Milford, CT (where the town’s two stations are on both the northbound and southbound sides of I-95), the new charging stations, according to Tesla, will make it possible to drive one of its roadsters between the Boston and Washington, DC metropolitan areas.

As is the case with the six charging stations in California, the Supercharger stations are located in areas where there are plenty of options for road warriors to refuel (er, recharge)--well, as far as rest stops go. The “adrenaline shot” for Tesla’s batteries can boost a Tesla battery a total of half a charge for one of its car’s batteries in 30 minutes, the equivalent of 150 miles of range.

For Tesla owners, the east coast supercharging stations make traveling along I-95 (the artery of the U.S. eastern seaboard) almost as attractive an option as commuting by Tesla in California. Currently six Supercharging stations are operational in California, and all of them are in heavily trafficked areas such as Tejon Ranch, Harris Ranch and Gilroy. Additional stations in Folsom and Barstow make commutes by electric vehicle (EV) to playgrounds such as Lake Tahoe and Las Vegas a viable option. Electric vehicles suffer from the perception that a drive between San Francisco and LA--or Boston and DC--is too tedious without means to recharge one’s car quickly, even if the reality is that most car owners do not complete such drives often.

To that end, Tesla claims it will have at least 100 of these charging stations by 2015. The average Tesla owner may not be intrigued by options such as Dunkin’ Donuts or McDonald’s while he or she waits for the car to score a recharge, but compared to the 16 miles a 240 volt recharger offers a Tesla in 30 minutes, the 90KW Supercharger is a much more attractive option.

Tesla has faced countless challenges the past several years, from consumer bias against EVs to the recent financial crises and even a recent divestment by the Abu Dhabi government. Nevertheless its all-electric Model S won the most recent Motor Trend Car of the Year award, and the new Supercharger stations will only boost the appeal of the Tesla Brand. Tesla claims that much of the power at these Supercharger stations will generate power from solar energy. Tesla has a long way to go if it is going to meet this Supercharger goal in two years, but in the meantime, owners who travel between San Francisco and LA or along the east coast will have plenty of fun on the road.

Leon Kaye, based in Fresno, California, is a sustainability consultant and the editor of GreenGoPost.com. He also contributes to Guardian Sustainable Business; his work has also appeared on Sustainable Brands, Inhabitat and Earth911. You can follow Leon and ask him questions on Twitter or Instagram (greengopost).

Image credit: Tesla

With the New Year and newly minted, well-intentioned resolutions upon us, I thought it might be a good time to post some compass readings with respect to the world energy picture. My year-end summary emphasized the growing importance of natural gas as an energy source, and the piece that came after that described America’s soon-to-be emergence as the leading producer of oil and gas.

A new announcement this week puts these discussions, as well as our recent gains in sustainable energy into perspective, dramatically revealing how much further we still have to go when we look at the global picture. The Worldwatch Institute report points out that while oil still represents the largest energy source, both coal and natural gas have seen significant increases in production and consumption. The report, which tracks usage through the end of 2011, says that coal consumption increased by 5.4 percent, while natural gas usage rose 2.2 percent.

This brings coal’s share of the energy mix up to 28 percent, the highest percentage on record since the IEA began tracking this data in 1971 (it was likely higher than that at some point before that year). The increase comes despite rising global awareness of carbon’s role in causing climate change, and despite coal being the largest carbon-emitting energy source of all.

Seventy percent of global demand came from countries outside of the OECD, mainly India and China. In fact, China alone accounted for nearly 50 percent of all demand. The U.S. was the second largest user, though it saw a decrease in consumption of roughly 5 percent which was offset by shale gas and wind. In 2008, coal accounted for 50 percent of all U.S. electric generation. That number is expected to drop to 30 percent by 2020. Despite the decline, the U.S. still accounts for 45 percent of all OECD consumption.

India had the second highest coal consumption growth rate and is expected to overtake the U.S. as number two by 2025, becoming the largest net importer of coal, much of which will come from the U.S., which has the largest reserves of any country. China, which is third, after Russia, has substantial reserves, which is one of the reasons they are burning it so freely to power their rapidly growing economy. During the decade from 2001-11, China accounted for 80 percent of the increase in global demand.

So while U.S. coal consumption continues to drop, production remains steady, with an export boom underway. Exports have doubled in just the past three years.

So, in essence, all the coal that we have stopped burning domestically, is being burned in China and India instead, plus a whole lot more.

That might be good for coal producers (though mining jobs continue to fall primarily due to automation), but it is not good for anyone concerned about curbing carbon emissions in an effort to rein in a runaway climate.

So, what is China doing about this? Do they merely have their heads in the sand? Are they blithely ignoring the problem while focusing exclusively on economic growth?

While it is easy for us to point fingers, we should keep in mind that people who live in glass houses, otherwise known as greenhouses, should not throw stones.  The fact is that China is doing quite a bit to curb emissions. True, they are producing lots of carbon, but they are using it far more effectively than we ever did. Over the past twenty years, China has reduced the amount of carbon emitted per unit of GDP faster than any other nation. Their 12^th Five Year Plan, which covers 2011-15, contains a number of substantial carbon reduction initiatives. Among these are:

• Increase the proportion of non-fossil fuels in energy consumption to 11.4 percent by 2015


• Reduce energy per unit of gross domestic product (GDP) by 16 percent by 2015


• Reduce carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP by 17 percent by 2015

Additionally, as part of UN climate negotiations, China pledged to increase forest coverage by 40 million hectares and forest stock volume by 1.3 billion cubic meters compared to 2005, by 2020.

China also plans to establish carbon trading markets in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangdong, which may go national by 2015.

They also claim the world’s largest installed base of renewable electricity generation. China’s investment in clean energy surged this past year, growing 92 percent in 2Q to $18.3 billion, or a little over 30 percent of the global total. China has also surpassed the U.S. in smart grid investment and in wind power. Chinese wind generation capacity is projected to roughly double by 2015.

Of course, both the U.S. and China can do a lot more to speed the transition. Neither country has demonstrated anything close to Germany’s commitment to renewables, though, of course, circumstances vary.

China’s rapid growth follows the contours of the economic landscape, in which energy plays a major role. The passage of a carbon tax in the U.S., therefore, could possibly be the largest single step to drive progress on this critically urgent issue.

What else can be done? Peter Ward, a professor of Biology and Earth Science at the University of Washington, and an expert on extinctions, says that we should stop exporting coal to China.

Whether we could muster the political will in Washington to take such a principled stand in the face of protests over government intervention in business and job losses, is questionable at best. But, as Ward points out, these seemingly drastic choices will likely pale in comparison to the choices that will probably be foisted upon our descendants.

[Image credit: wombatundergound1: Flickr creative commons]

RP Siegel, PE, is an inventor, consultant and author. He co-wrote the eco-thriller Vapor Trails, the first in a series covering the human side of various sustainability issues including energy, food, and water in an exciting and entertaining format. Now available on Kindle.

Follow RP Siegel on Twitter.

Last week Sempra U.S. Gas & Power and BP Wind Energy launched a 21 megawatt (MW) wind power facility on the island of Maui. The Auwahi Wind Farm off of Maui’s southern coast opened on December 27, nine months after ground broke on the project within the Ulupalakua Ranch.

According to Sempra, the wind farm will generate enough electricity to power 10,000 homes. Leaders including then-Hawaii Lt. Gov. (now U.S. Senator) Brian Shatz touted the eight-turbine wind farm as another step towards Hawaii’s goal of scoring 40 percent of its power from clean energy sources by 2030. While the 50th state has attracted plenty of attention over its ambitious solar energy program, wind power has also been an important cog in Hawaii’s renewable energy agenda.

Despite the fickle economy of the past decade, Maui’s tourism-based economy has continued to surge while concerns over the environment dogs large projects such as Auwahi. Traffic was also an issue, so the project’s managers took several steps to minimize construction traffic. Larger turbines reduced the total count from the original 15 to eight to reduce the overall transport needed to build the site. Sempra and BP set the traffic schedule to avoid the transport of materials during peak times. The 180 workers assigned to the site also carpooled a minimum 25 percent of the time to keep more cars and trucks off local roads.

Power from the Auwahi Wind Farm will be sold to Maui Electric Company (MECO) under a 20 year contract. Advocates of clean energy may want to mute their praise of Auwahi as a “green jobs” generator; the wind farm at most will employ four or five employees. But what is encouraging about Auwahi is the battery capacity onsite: a 10 MW battery will have the ability to store as much as 4.4 megawatt hours of electricity.

So, despite the constant threat of the “fiscal cliff,” Hawaii’s volatile tourist industry and often vehement criticism of wind power, this form of energy is not going away anytime soon. Fossil fuels will only continue their price trajectory upward, so look for Hawaii, as well as other states, to continue to put more wind power farms on the drawing board.

Leon Kaye, based in Fresno, California, is a sustainability consultant and the editor of GreenGoPost.com. He also contributes to Guardian Sustainable Business; his work has also appeared on Sustainable Brands, Inhabitat and Earth911. You can follow Leon and ask him questions on Twitter or Instagram (greengopost).

Image credit: Sempra