Search

After years of local battles across the state of Colorado, the fracking debate is about to come home to roost.

On Feb. 10, a coalition of youth, businesses, community and religious leaders announced their opposition to fracking -- which is currently in the planning stages not only in Denver neighborhoods, but also the plateau up in the Rockies that supplies almost 40 percent of the city’s water.

The “Don’t Frack Denver” coalition assembled on the steps of Denver City Hall on Tuesday and warned passionately about the public health dangers posed by fracking. Then, the group delivered letters to the offices of Mayor Michael Hancock and city council, calling for an immediate moratorium on fracking in the city limits. Protesters also asked local politicians for support in the fight to stop fracking upstream in the South Platte River watershed, the city’s chief source of water.

“Fracking makes Coloradans sick, drives down property values, and contaminates our public water and clean air,” said Sam Schabaker, western region director of Food and Water Watch. "Denver's exceptional quality of life is too precious to risk: Fracking must not take place in our community or watershed."

Themes of discrimination and environmental racism emerged as residents talked about specific sites that were targeted. The Green Valley neighborhood, which is one possible site, is one of the most ethnically diverse neighborhoods in the city. Green Valley Ranch is where Mayor Hancock hails from.

“We want to be here to put a face to the name,” said Rossina Schroeer-Santiago, there with Green Valley Families Against Fracking. “Green Valley is the mayor’s community.”

The mayor’s office released this statement from deputy communications officer Amber Miller:

“Mayor Hancock hears their concerns loud and clear and will continue to work toward a shared goal of preserving our environment and quality of life here in Denver. The Mayor is keeping a keen eye on this issue, and eagerly anticipates the recommendations from the Governor’s Oil and Gas Task Force before any action would be considered on a municipal level.

“Understanding the Task Force is working on a responsible balance, the Mayor asks for the community and stakeholders to remain patient and allow a thoughtful process to take place.”

The upstream watershed fracking under consideration is a plan by the Bureau of Land Management to lease 250,000 acres in the South Park grasslands for drilling.

With 20 percent of the nation’s oil and gas wells, “the West is a critical point of engagement in efforts to transition fully from fossil fuels in the United States," said the regional nonprofit Wild Earth Guardians. The “Don’t Frack Denver” coalition also included a broad spectrum of area businesses whose interests would be undercut if elected officials sided with the oil and gas industry: Denver’s vibrant breweries, outdoor recreation, tourism, kayaking companies and restaurants.

But perhaps the most direct sentiment came from legendary Colorado nature photographer John Fielder, whose gorgeous images of the state’s grandeur are on thousands of coffee table books, postcards, poster, calendars and mugs.

“Fracking … is dirty, smelly, poisonous, noisy and unsightly, and it has no place in the beautiful Mile-High City -- not in the headwaters of its water supply, the South Platte, nor in any of our pristine mountain valleys.”

For more information, factsheets and maps, please visit Don't Frack Denver online.

Images courtesy of Don't Frack Denver. 

Hate speech and the Internet can go hand-in-hand, including on Facebook. It recently came to my attention that Facebook does not enforce its own standards regarding hate speech. While scrolling through posts on my Facebook feed, I came across a post about an anti-Armenian group. The name of the said group was “F--k Armenia.” The posts in the group were very derogatory of Armenia and Armenians. Using “F--k Armenia” as a search term turned up about 10 other groups with that name.

There is a context to the proliferation of anti-Armenian Facebook groups that many may not know. This year on April 24, Armenians worldwide will mark the 100th anniversary of the beginning of the Armenian genocide perpetrated by the Turkish government. About 1.5 million Armenians, or 3 out of every 4 Armenians living under the Ottoman Turkish empire, were murdered. To this day the Turkish government refuses to recognize the genocide and continues its campaign of denial, even going to the extreme of stating that Armenians murdered Turks.

There are over 11,000 members of the Facebook group “I am a Descendant of a Survivor of the Armenian Genocide,” and judging by the comments on the post regarding the anti-Armenian page, many, including me, reported the anti-Armenian group. What we received back from Facebook was the following message:

"Thank you for taking the time to report something that you feel may violate our Community Standards. Reports like yours are an important part of making Facebook a safe and welcoming environment. We reviewed the Page you reported for containing hate speech or symbols and found it doesn't violate our Community Standards."

Looking at the hate speech section of Facebook’s Community Standards, it becomes apparent that the anti-Armenian groups are considered hate speech by those very standards:

"Facebook does not permit hate speech, but distinguishes between serious and humorous speech. While we encourage you to challenge ideas, institutions, events, and practices, we do not permit individuals or groups to attack others based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability or medical condition."

Anti-Armenian groups are not the only racist groups on Facebook. There are also groups called “F--k Mexico” and “F--k Azerbaijan.” I reported every hate group I came across and received the same message that I posted above.

Only one page was removed by Facebook, and that is the initial anti-Armenian page I learned about. Many others also reported it. Clearly, it takes a good amount of pressure for Facebook to take down racist sites and adhere to its own standards.

Image credit: Master OSM 2011

Tulare County, California, recently surpassed nearby Fresno County as the top agriculture-producing county in terms of economic value within the U.S. It's also the country's top dairy producing county. The result has been more investment and economic growth in a rapidly booming area already home to 450,000 people.

But there is also a downside to the local dairy industry’s continued surge: The San Joaquin Valley suffers from some of worst air pollution in the U.S., and cow effluent is a threat to the region’s already troubled watersheds.

The launch yesterday of the Calgren Ethanol Biogester, a manure-to-ethanol plant in Pixley, about 60 miles south of Fresno, is a step toward reducing emissions and dependence on fossil fuels while helping California meet its clean energy goals. According to the companies that worked together on this project, the plant is also the first digester in California to transform agricultural waste into cleaner natural gas to power another renewable energy facility. Instead of relying on the local grid, the otherwise energy-intensive ethanol plant is part of what is close to a closed loop and zero-waste system.

A coalition of several companies, funded in part with a $4.6 million grant from the California Energy Commission, is behind the plant. Designed by DVO of Wisconsin, the anaerobic digester — the core of this plant — was built by Regenis, a Washington state-based contractor. Calgren Renewable Fuels will operate the plant, which will produce up to 58 million gallons of ethanol annually, enough to fuel 145,000 cars a year.

The process starts with a local dairy down the street, Four J Farms, home to about 1,800 dairy-producing cattle. Cow manure from the dairy is piped to the Calgren plant, where it is first stored in the DVO-designed digester that is 16 feet deep and insulated with concrete to prevent any leakage. Bacteria that are naturally occurring in a cow’s digestive system is added to the manure, which is stored and churned there for 22 days — long enough to kill any pathogens including e coli. Moisture extracted from the manure is recycled so local farmers cause use it to water their crops, and the by-product — clean and 99.99 percent bacteria-free — is sent back to Four J Farms so it can be used as animal bedding.

The plant operates akin to a cow’s digestive system, keeping the feedstock at a temperature of 101.5 degrees Fahrenheit (38.5 degrees Celsius) so that the plant can continue to produce these biofuels 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Most importantly from an environmental perspective, the plant turns methane, a potent greenhouse gas that is the bane of the dairy industry, into cleaner burning biogas.

“Electricity (to power cars) and hydrogen are getting a lot of media attention these days as the fuels of the future. But it is the workhouse plants like this Calgren facility that reduce the carbon content of our fuel supply,” said Jim McKinney, a project manager for CEC’s Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program. McKinney noted that the ethanol produced at this plant is the lowest carbon-emitting ethanol currently produced at an industrial scale in California.

More biodigesters such as the one at the Calgren plant could help California solve multiple challenges -- including the increased production of clean transport fuels, achieving reduced agricultural waste and an improvement in the San Joaquin Valley’s air quality. “There is enough organic waste (in California) to power 2 to 3 million homes or to generate 2.5 billion gallons of clean, ultra-low carbon transportation fuels,” said Regenis Vice President Bryan VanLoo. In addition, Steve Dvorak, president of DVO, noted that one cow alone creates about 100 to 130 cubic feet of biogas a day, the equivalent of 65,000 BTUs or 6 kilowatt hours daily.

The Calgren plant at first comes across as a seamless and logical way to augment California’s energy portfolio, boost local waste diversion efforts and create new jobs. But today’s launch was long in the making: The project was first conceptualized in 2009 and took several years to come to fruition. Ensuring a reliable supply of feedstock and gaining the buy-in of local businesses and politicians are among the challenges projects like this one confront. But as long cows produce milk, there will always be waste — and what I saw yesterday is a far cleaner and more productive option than the costly and environmentally risky disposal of cow manure.

Image credits: Leon Kaye

Based in California, Leon Kaye has also been featured in The Guardian, Clean Technica, Sustainable Brands, Earth911, Inhabitat, Architect Magazine and Wired.com. He shares his thoughts on his own site, GreenGoPost.com. Follow him on Twitter and Instagram.

Last year, another cotton harvest in Uzbekistan made its way to the market on the backs of Uzbek citizens forced to labor in the cotton fields.  Yet, while some significant corporate holdouts remain, recent research by the Responsible Sourcing Network suggests that several international brands -- including Hanes, Sears and Target -- are doing more to keep Uzbek cotton out of their products and supply chains.

In light of the World Bank’s recent decision not to investigate connections between the Bank’s development projects and the forced labor in Uzbekistan, positive steps by apparel and home goods companies are vital.

The RSN pledge and survey

In 2011, the Responsible Sourcing Network (RSN) launched its “Cotton Pledge” campaign, asking apparel and home goods companies around the world to commit to keeping Uzbek cotton out of their products for as long as Uzbekistan continues to rely on forced labor.  As of Jan. 16, 165 companies have signed the pledge -- including household names like adidas, Gap, Patagonia and Sears, the latest corporate signatory.

Recently, RSN decided that eliciting company promises was not enough -- the group would also seek to measure the cotton sourcing practices of some of the world’s biggest corporate cotton consumers.  To that end, RSN, a human rights project of the nonprofit organization As You Sow, issued a survey to 49 apparel and home goods companies and graded their responses on a 100-point scale. The survey relied on data from 11 different indicators, in categories ranging from “public disclosure” to “implementation and audits.”

RSN published its initial results last year, which were by and large disappointing.  Only five companies’ scores eclipsed the 50-point mark; 19 companies scored under 25 points; and two companies scored zero.  Further, only 4 percent of the 49 companies surveyed had supplier codes of conduct that reached the harvesting level, and only 2 percent “fully disclose[d] progress and/or any challenges with their strategies on Uzbek cotton.”  The lowest scoring companies were All Saints (0), Urban Outfitters (0), Costco (2.5), Forever 21 (2.5) and Sears (2.5), at the time not even a signatory to the pledge.

More positively, 41 percent of the companies surveyed had requirements for tracing their cotton’s country of origin, and 35 percent of companies described what RSN categorized as “robust” sourcing policies and action plans.

RSN’s 2015 addendum

After RSN published its 2014 report on the survey results, a number of brands -- perhaps unhappy with what their scores communicated about their efforts to oppose forced labor -- requested an opportunity to supplement their initial survey responses.  RSN re-submitted the survey to 19 of the original 49 companies, seven of which responded to the second survey.

Highlights:  The new responses were mostly encouraging.  All seven of the responding companies significantly improved their scores and all are now engaged in at least one multi-stakeholder initiative to source more responsibly and/or operate more sustainably.

Crucially, six of the seven now report having adopted supplier codes of conduct that reach all the way down to the harvesting level.

One of the biggest gainers, Hanes, reported that virtually all of its cotton is processed through spinners and knitting facilities Hanes itself owns, and sourced almost exclusively from within the U.S.  Consequently, Hanes’s score shot up from a meager 10 out of 100 to a respectable 54.5.

The newest signatory to the Cotton Pledge, Sears, saw its score rise from an embarrassing 2.5 out of 100 (making it one of the five lowest scoring companies on the original survey) to a 26. Target, Kate Spade and Kering also greatly improved.

Lowlights:  Some of the results were less positive, however.  For one, neither of the companies that scored zero on the initial survey, Urban Outfitters and All Saints, even bothered to respond to the second survey.  In fact, none of the 10 lowest scoring companies on RSN’s list responded.

Most of the 49 companies also remain reluctant to report on tangible progress (or not) made toward rooting out Uzbek cotton from their supply chains, perhaps for fear of being criticized for doing too little.  This lack of transparency is endemic in the industry and, to RSN, speaks to the challenges companies face in actually holding their suppliers to account.  Enforcement faces a real hurdle when a contractual relationship does not extend from a brand all the way down its supply chain to the harvesting level, for instance.

The complicity of the World Bank

Last month, the World Bank announced that its Inspections Panel would not further examine the connection between forced labor in Uzbekistan’s cotton fields and the Bank’s development projects there, even though an initial review by the panel found that the Bank’s Uzbekistan projects were “plausibly linked” to the government’s forced labor practices.  The panel’s decision not to further investigate was based at least in part on the fact that the International Labor Organization (ILO) is already monitoring the situation.  The ILO has touted improvements in the Uzbek cotton-picking operation, including that the government now relies less on the labor of children; yet, as I have pointed out before, prominent human rights groups disagreed with some of the core findings of the Uzbek monitors and have documented continued human rights abuses that go beyond simply forcing citizens to leave their jobs to labor solely for the government’s benefit.

As a result of the World Bank’s decision, the Uzbek government will continue to receive international financing that is earmarked for its cotton operations -- operations which would crumble if the government gave up its forced labor practices entirely.

Thus, it is now more important than ever for major apparel and home goods companies to ensure that Uzbek cotton is not used in their products.  It is therefore particularly heartening to read of the progress documented by RSN and find that brands are taking this issue seriously.  Ultimately, Uzbek cotton will find its way to the market, but we and the companies making the products we buy don’t have to support it.

Image credit: Flickr/David Stanley

The Obama administration continues to forge ahead in its drive to promote energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy use in urban and rural areas alike. Passage of the 2014 U.S. Farm Bill has paved the way for the Department of Agriculture to expand funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects among farmers, ranchers and small businesses in rural communities nationwide.

In a press conference on Feb. 10 Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced $280 million for new REAP (Rural Energy for America Program) grants and loans is now available. In addition to more secure funding that came with passage of the 2014 U.S. Farm Bill, Secretary Vilsack also highlighted improvements that streamline REAP and make it easier for rural residents and businesses to apply for and obtain REAP funding.

Illustrating the beneficial real-world impact REAP is having in rural communities across the U.S., two rural small business owners reported on their experiences applying for, being awarded and putting REAP grant and loan funds to work.

More federal funding for rural energy efficiency and renewables

Kicking off the Feb. 10 press conference, Sec. Vilsack announced that $80 million in new REAP grant funding is now available. Another $200 million is available for REAP loans, while $2 million has been set aside for audits.

"Developing renewable energy presents an enormous economic opportunity for rural America. The funding we are making available will help farmers, ranchers, business owners, tribal organizations and other entities incorporate renewable energy and energy efficiency technology into their operations,” Vilsack said.

“Doing so can help a business reduce energy use and costs while improving its bottom line. While saving producers money and creating jobs, these investments reduce dependence on foreign oil and cut carbon pollution as well."

Farmers, ranchers and small business owners in rural communities can apply for REAP grants for energy efficiency upgrades up to $250,000 and renewable energy installations up to $500,000. REAP grant applications cannot exceed 25 percent of the total cost of such projects.

In addition, REAP loans of as much as $25 million are now available. A total REAP loan cap has been set at $200 million, while a combination of REAP grants and loans cannot exceed 75 percent of total project costs.

Congress passing the 2014 U.S. Farm Bill provided greater security and assurance that REAP will be able to finance smaller-scale rural energy efficiency and renewable projects in years to come, Secretary Vilsack pointed out. “In the past we had to be concerned about year-to-changes in budget allocations and available funding,” he said.

In addition, the Rural Utilities Service (RUS), which serves as the Agriculture Department's public point-man for REAP, has streamlined the grant and loan application and approval process, making it easier for rural farmers, ranchers and business owners to understand, apply and qualify for REAP funding. Significantly, RUS will now be accepting and evaluating REAP loan applications year-round on a rolling basis. Grant applications will continue to be accepted and evaluated during specific periods of the year, with the first crop of new REAP grant awards expected this June.

Renewable Energy for America

REAP is proving to be a success story as part and parcel of the Obama administration's efforts to promote energy efficiency and distributed renewable energy. Promoting renewables, Sec. Vilsack touted, is a means to lower electricity bills, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, create and support well-paying jobs, and enhance U.S. economic competitiveness.

Some $545 million in REAP grants and loans have been awarded to fund over 8,800 energy efficiency and renewable energy installation projects across rural America since 2009. These have resulted in some 600 billion kilowatt-hours of renewable energy production, enough to meet the needs of about 5.5 million homes on an annual basis, Vilsack noted.

Following Sec. Vilsack's brief speech, rural area small business owners Jennifer Womble, of Supersave Foods Arkansas, and Jeffrey Marstaller, owner of Maine's Cozy Acres Greenhouse, gave brief first-hand accounts. In their remarks, the two illustrated how REAP funding enabled them to rebuild and expand their small businesses by carrying out energy efficiency upgrades and making use of solar photovoltaic (PV) power.

Serving a community of just under 6,000 in rural Arkansas, Supersave Foods was robbed and set ablaze in 2011, forcing owner Jennifer Womble to let go of all employees. Searching for the means to rebuild, Womble initially submitted a REAP grant application in 2011 but was turned down.

After reapplying, Supersave Foods was awarded a REAP grant of over $137,000 in 2013. That enabled Womble to set about rebuilding the business and making it more energy efficient. Replacing equipment that was as much as 20 years old, higher insulation roofing was installed along with high energy-efficiency windows and LED lighting.

Conducting an energy audit, Womble figures she has reduced her combined electricity and gas bills by around 32 percent as a result. REAP, Womble said, “made funds available for things we might otherwise have not been able to do.”

A zero-emissions greenhouse in snowy Maine

Up in a “very snowy Maine,” Jeffrey Marsteller, the owner of Cozy Acres Greenhouses, has been cultivating annuals, herbs and vegetables for gardeners, landscapers and farmers the old-fashioned way since 2001. Across seven traditional greenhouses, Cozy Acres typically burns some 10,000 gallons of propane to keep plants warm during the long, cold Maine winters.

In 2011, Cozy Acres decided it needed to expand, but wanted to do so without increasing its carbon footprint, Marsteller explained. Like Supersave Foods' owner Jennifer Womble, Marsteller had never applied for federal funding before. “The folks at USDA were vitally helpful in walking us through the process,” he said.

Being awarded a REAP grant kicked off a “series of events” that included construction of a 25,000 square-foot, zero-emissions greenhouse. Marsteller used the REAP award to install a 30-kilowatt solar PV system and a 10-ton in-ground geothermal heating system. Combining solar PV and geothermal heating means that Cozy Acres' new greenhouse generates zero in the way of carbon emissions.

“The PV system generates 39,000 kilowatt-hours per year of electrical energy, less than the 37 kWh needed for the new greenhouse each year,” Marsteller pointed out. “We believe we have the only greenhouse in the northern two-thirds of the U.S. heated all winter with zero emissions. We get electricity from the sun, heat from the earth and emissions are zero."

*Image credits: 1) Center for Rural Affairs; 2) Farm Futures ; 3) Plants4Maine.com

Short of cash these days? A new medical enterprise may have just the cure.

A nonprofit organization in Medford, Mass., is on the cusp of a medical frontier that (at least for now) promises a lucrative outcome for its donor base. And that, is in part, because it can be really hard to find that perfect donor.

OpenBiome, which was launched by Mark Smith and James Burgess in 2012, is in the business of curing clostridium difficile -- a gastrointestinal disorder that has become increasingly more frequent in the last 20 years. It's also become increasingly more difficult to cure, with at least 20 percent of the cases treated lapsing into recurrent symptoms.

The answer that OpenBiome, and researchers from institutions like the Mayo Clinic, have come up with may not seem your standard treatment regimen. But it works.

Each year, more than 500,000 people in the U.S. contract C. difficile, explains OpenBiome on its website. That's because, "[In] a healthy gut community, C. difficile is out-competed by the hundreds of strains of bacteria that are normally present." But with antibiotic therapy for, say, a tooth infection, that bacteria is often killed off. The result is an opportunistic environment where C. difficile can not only live -- but really thrive.

"However, in hundreds of treatments in many independent institutions, fecal transplantation, which reconstitutes the healthy gut community, has been shown to cure over 90 percent of the most recalcitrant C. difficile cases," says OpenBiome.

Yes, you read that right. Fecal microbiota transplantation, or FMT, is the magic potion that's been shown to cure C. difficile, largely by replacing the much-needed friendly bacteria that has been killed off by routine antibiotics.

But, of course, in order for practitioners to administer the gut-friendly flora, they have to get it from somewhere -- or someone -- else, and that's where the healthy donor comes in.

And the healthy payments, too.

Donors who qualify to donate their poop are paid $40 a day, up to five times a week, with an extra $50 for being regularly available all five days. That means earnings of up to $13,000 a year.

But before you start racing to fill out OpenBiome's donor page, perhaps we should stress the operant word again: healthy. Like seriously healthy.

Only about 4 percent of the individuals who apply through the website qualify to donate their poop.

"It's harder to become a donor than it is to get into MIT," said Smith in an interview with the Washington Post. That should say something, since Smith is a graduate of MIT. Another catch: Donors also have to be able to come into the Medford office in person each day.

But even though the money sounds great, for many donors, says OpenBiome's founders, it also comes down to helping those who are sick, such as elderly patients who are bedridden from recurrent illnesses and for whom standard treatment no longer works on C. difficile. According to C Diff Foundation, 30,000 people die of C. difficile-related illnesses each year (U.S. Health and Human Services statistics).

MayoClinic, which pioneered research in this field in 2011, notes that the elderly are particularly susceptible to C. difficile, which often can accompany other illnesses and result in hospitalization. FMT, which can be administered in a variety of ways including by capsule (a recent innovation), has been known to improve a patient's health in a matter of hours to days, making the new treatment invaluable.

FMT is also being considered for a number of other ailments, but those treatments are still being investigated. If healthy microbes can bring a bedridden person back to health, what can it do for people who have other digestive illnesses, like irritable bowel syndrome, Crohn's disease or celiac disease?

OpenBiome, which is a 501(c) 3 nonprofit and is supported by research organizations like Tufts, Harvard and MIT, hasn't delved into this arena yet. But with FMT treatment for C. difficile solidly on the way, and having recently treated its thousandth patient, this new frontier may be only the start of things to come.

Image credit: US Navy/Stephen P. Weaver

Join Social Venture Network for the 2015 SVN Spring Conference, April 16-19, in San Diego. The event is open to active members, affiliates, family members and first-time prospective members. Click here to register.

As a lead-up to the conference, SVN is sharing best business practices from its members in a series of short video clips. Follow the series here.

By Social Venture Network

SVN members have launched some of the most innovative organizations in the mission-driven business community. They've experienced success, failure, setbacks, and breakthroughs... and are very candid about the lessons they learned the hard way.

In this video, SVN member Vince Siciliano, CEO of New Resource Bank, talks about the role purpose and values have played in his career as an executive in the banking industry.

For more business advice from SVN members, check out "The Best Advice I Never Got" here.

Image and video courtesy of Social Venture Network

By Michael Blauw

While the House hones in on its flagship energy issue for the new session, attention on the Keystone XL pipeline detracts from a number of other significant developments in our quest toward a more vibrant economy.

Keystone is a symbolic issue for our new Congress, but despite the pipeline’s virtues and vices, the legislation is only one small piece of America’s overall energy strategy. Consequently, as Keystone garners the bulk of recent media coverage, policies with much more impact are quietly being enacted at the state and local levels -- policies that truly bolster energy infrastructure.

As state lawmakers have shown, even as oil issues remain salient, the hyper-influence of fossil fuels is waning in the grand scheme of energy and infrastructure policy. Three significant pivots made by state officials in the last month have solidified that clean energy’s importance to America is swelling — much to the benefit of the economy.

States take action on renewable energy

Emboldened by fresh electoral victories, state officials in New York, California and Washington state have shifted their focus from building fossil fuel infrastructure to hastening the scale-up of renewable energy technologies.

Last month, Gov. Jerry Brown announced plans to expand California’s renewable energy goals. The state originally planned to source 30 percent of its power from renewables by 2020. The new goal ups that total to 50 percent by 2030.

Though the governor’s proposal may seem bold, America’s most populous state is already on track to meet its ambitious energy goals. Better yet, local business leaders and private financiers are confident that, with more clean energy infrastructure like distributed power, rooftop solar and micro-grids, they can meet the state’s energy demands all while creating thousands of good-paying jobs.

In the state of Washington, Gov. Jay Inslee is using policy tools to show he’s equally committed to ramping up clean energy and spurring job creation, albeit through more creative means. His state has proposed a tax on carbon emissions for Washington’s biggest polluters, while flipping those revenues into funds for road improvements and clean tech initiatives. If such a proposal comes to pass, Washington will add significantly to the 84 percent of its energy it already receives from renewables, and the 100,000 workers the industry employs.

And as if to set the tone for 2015, New York made some of the most aggressive policy moves in recent years to bolster the clean economy. After helping to funnel billions in private investment to the clean tech field, business-friendly policies were able to coax renewable energy giants — like SolarCity — to Buffalo, and attract millions in other research grants to in-state colleges and universities. The state capped off its commitment to renewables when its legislature disallowed hydraulic fracturing, thus making renewable technologies the state’s energy driver from this point onward.

Beyond Keystone XL: Renewables gain clout in the energy market

Despite what may happen with the Keystone XL pipeline, these policy pivots in the states are significant and creative, and they deserve our attention. Their impact will be far greater than that of any single pipeline and give us an important glimpse at what energy infrastructure will look like in 2015 and beyond. Equally notable, these states are serving as laboratories for policy innovation, and Congress is already taking stock of these trends.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Alaskan Republican and new chairwoman of the Energy and Natural Resources committee, said she's optimistically working with colleagues to draft a broader energy package that she hopes to release in the spring. This sweeping energy bill has serious potential to find support and could very well include pro-growth, clean energy concepts spearheaded by state governments. In addition, Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) are eager to put forth a comprehensive tax bill in the coming months -- one which may include business-friendly policies like extensions on the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind development and Investment Tax Credit (ITC) for solar.

Overshadowed by the clout of Keystone XL, renewable energy is making a more discreet, but unprecedented, assent in America’s energy market. Case in point: Even with the lowest gas prices in decades, American energy is becoming increasingly cleaner and more prevalent. Leaps and bounds by state leaders are moving America far closer to a clean economy than one would imagine by reading the headlines. However, as clean energy policies become more wildly embraced, let’s hope to see much larger — and much more economically beneficial — gains to be made during this session of Congress.

Image credit: Flickr/Chuck Coker

Michael Blauw is a Policy Analyst and Writer at the American Council On Renewable Energy.

FMCG giants Danone, Nestle, Procter & Gamble, Reckitt Benkiser, Kao and Unilever are among the top players tackling the problem of deforestation, according to a new ranking from charity Global Canopy Programme.

Banking group HSBC was also among the top scorers.

The data was drawn from over 40,000 data points from public and private sources. The Global Canopy Programme (GCP) identified, assessed and ranked 250 companies, with total annual revenues in excess of US $4.5 trillion; 150 investors and lenders; 50 countries and regions; and 50 other influential actors in this space.

According to GCP, these 500 operators control the complex global supply chains of key ‘forest risk commodities’ such as soya, palm oil, beef, leather, timber, pulp and paper that have an annual trade value of more than US $ 100bn and are found in over 50% of packaged products in supermarkets.

GCP maintains that deforestation and land use change cause more than 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions, undermine regional water security, and threaten the livelihoods of more than one billion people worldwide.

Thirty companies, many based in Asia and the Middle East, and numerous investors scored zero points. Countries received a range of scores, with Latin American nations scoring high in forested regions and the Netherlands and Germany coming top amongst countries that import forest risk commodities.

“We are currently all part of a global deforestation economy. Deforestation is in our chocolate and our toothpaste, our animal feed and our textbooks, our buildings and our furniture, our investments and our pensions,” said Mario Rautner, The Global Canopy Programme’s Drivers of Deforestation Programme Manager.

“Our goal with the Forest 500 is to provide precise and actionable information to measure the progress of society to achieve zero deforestation. Together, these 500 countries, companies and investors have the power to clean up global supply chains and virtually put an end to tropical deforestation.”

Read the full results here. www.forest500.org
 

It has been a rough year for McDonald’s, which of course has resulted in plenty of Schadenfreude from its critics.

The fast food giant keeps losing market share to fast-casual restaurants such as Chipotle and Panera Bread, and other competitors find a way to thrive while its new marketing campaigns fall flat with customers. Despite a modest uptick in business in its largest markets, Europe and the U.S., last month’s sales dropped overall due to a plunge in revenues within the Middle East, Asia and Africa.

In a world where more people are concerned about their food choices, the company is trying to change. McDonald’s has listened somewhat to consumers’ demands for more healthful and sustainable menu choices. The company now serves 100 percent sustainable fish, and a year ago said it would start sourcing sustainable beef in 2016.

So, how is that working out for McDonald’s?

The short answer is . . . it’s well, . . . going. Slowly. As would be the case with any massive shift in business practices, transforming McDonald’s supply chain is going to take some time. But will this change come soon enough at a time during which customers under the age of 35 are abandoning the company while the company struggles to reinvent itself, digs in its heels, then changes course again?

In fairness to the company, the company’s success, and future survival, depends on the ranchers who supply the company’s most iconic product: beef. While multinationals such as Cargill and Brazil’s JBS control a huge part of the global meat industry, ranching is still at the heart of this sector. And to many of those vested in raising cattle, it is not only a business, but way of life -- one that has not changed too much over generations. Furthermore, many ranchers operate on thin margins — a shift towards a more sustainable operation can only succeed if it allows those at the furthest reaches of the supply chain plenty of time to make these changes, so they do not go bankrupt in the name of making McDonald’s look better.

To that end, last year McDonald’s chose Canada to be the first country in which the company operates to serve only sustainable beef. Much of the work will involve setting up guidelines on everything from animal welfare to environmental stewardship and the development of steps to improve transparency. Arguably, McDonald’s work in Canada is also a pilot program for the recently announced Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (GRSB), a tiny step the beef industry has taken to become more accountable and responsible.

This step-by-step approach will be too slow for McDonald’s adversaries, who will also be chagrined to find, as detailed by Joel Makower in Green Biz, that your Big Mac or Quarter Pounder is hardly going to taste like beef raised in Argentina’s pampas: McDonald’s plan is to slowly increase the percentage of “sustainable beef” (as defined by McDonald’s) starting next year, and the company may set a percentage goal for the company 2020.

If McDonald’s can somehow succeed in sourcing beef that is less cruel and more environmentally responsible, it could cause a ricochet effect throughout the global meat industry. Rather annoyingly, McDonald’s tries to put an altruistic spin on why they are doing this, saying it is moving ahead even though its purchases only comprise 2 percent of the world’s total beef and dairy industry. But in the grand scheme of things, that is still an impressive amount for a single company — one that insists on serving pallid hamburgers when diners, foodies and those just looking for a cheap meal are constantly searching for something different.

Even if McDonald’s did not care about animal husbandry practices or greenhouse gas emissions, the company still must confront a huge challenge: Its hamburgers just do not taste good to today’s diner, while new chains from Umami Burger in Los Angeles to Five Guys, Shake Shack and The Habit are cleaning up with a more pleasant dining atmosphere — and better food. It is true that transforming a supply chain takes time. But for McDonald’s shareholders, these shifts have come too late — the company should have seen what was going on in the marketplace and initiated these changes many yesterdays ago.

Image credit: Robivy64

Based in California, Leon Kaye has also been featured in The Guardian, Clean Technica, Sustainable Brands, Earth911, Inhabitat, Architect Magazine and Wired.com. He shares his thoughts on his own site, GreenGoPost.com. Follow him on Twitter and Instagram.