Search

California, Massachusetts and Oregon topped the ranking of U.S. states in terms of clean tech leadership, while three California cities – San Francisco, San Jose and San Diego – came out tops among U.S. metro areas, according to the latest edition of Clean Edge's “2014 U.S. Clean Tech Leadership Index.”

Monitoring clean tech activities and conditions across all 50 U.S. states and the 50 largest U.S. metro areas, Clean Edge found that the improved performance and lower costs of clean technologies are prompting U.S. states and metro areas to tackle climate change head on.

"Climate disruption and the growing availability of market-competitive clean-energy technologies are driving many states and cities to tackle climate issues head-on," Clean Edge founder and managing director Ron Pernick said in a news release.

"More than ever, this year's Leadership Index highlights how some top regions are taking climate action seriously, with double-digit clean-energy adoption rates, new policies like California's energy-storage mandate, and the deployment of clean-energy investment vehicles such as New York's Green Bank."

Tracking U.S. Clean tech leadership

Aiming to monitor clean tech activities and conditions nationwide, Clean Edge's “U.S. Clean Tech Leadership Index” takes a broad range of factors into account – “from EV (electric vehicle) and renewables adoption to patent and investment activity,” the Portland, Oregon-based company explains.

In its latest edition, Clean Edge highlights the growing role non-hydro renewable energy is playing in the U.S. energy mix.

“Eleven states now generate more than 10 percent of their electricity from non-hydro renewable energy sources, with two – Iowa and South Dakota – exceeding 25 percent.”

Clean Edge goes on to highlight that U.S. solar installations surged 40 percent year-over-year. EV registrations also jumped significantly, doubling between the 2013 and 2014 indexes to reach some 200,000 nationwide.

Clean Edge also highlighted the important role supportive government policies and initiatives are having in the U.S. renewable energy and clean tech sectors, both directly and indirectly, serving as guideposts that private-sector businesses, communities and individuals are increasingly leveraging and capitalizing on. Elaborating, Clean Edge senior editor Clint Wilder said:

"Net-zero building and energy-storage mandates and new public-private investment vehicles are just a few of the emerging policies that are dramatically shifting the energy landscape. While there have been some regional attacks against clean-tech supportive policies, such as net metering and renewable portfolio standards, for the most part, the clean-tech industry and its allies have successfully fought off such efforts."

Top U.S. clean tech states and metro areas

Among U.S. states, California topped Clean Edge's clean tech index rankings for the fifth consecutive year. Massachusetts and Oregon ranked second and third, respectively, for the second year running. Hawaii and Minnesota dropped out of the top 10, while Vermont and Connecticut moved up.

In Clean Edge's Metro Index, San Francisco and San Jose repeated as the No. 1 and No. 2 U.S. clean tech metro areas. San Diego vaulted four places higher to No. 3, giving California the three top spots and five of the top seven. Eight of the top 10 clean tech metro areas are in the top four U.S. clean tech states, Washington D.C. and Austin, Texas being the only exceptions.

Following are the top 10 U.S. states for clean tech according to the “2014 Clean Tech Leadership Index”:

1. California


2. Massachusetts


3. Oregon


4. Colorado


5. New York


6. New Mexico


7. Washington


8. Illinois


9. Vermont


10. Connecticut

The top 10 leading clean tech metro areas are:

1. San Francisco


2. San Jose


3. San Diego


4. Portland, OR


5. Sacramento


6. Boston


7. Los Angeles


8. Washington, DC


9. Austin


10. Denver

A 49-page public version of the “2014 Clean Tech Leadership Index” is available free with registration on Clean Edge's website.

*Images credit: Clean Edge

UK businesses are missing out on a range of benefits by operating on the ‘border’ of compliancy when it comes to sustainable business practice, according to the annual sustainability survey from the British Institute of Facilities Management (BIFM).

The survey, led by BIFM in collaboration with Acclaro Advisory, and sponsored by Open Energi, investigated what aspects of the sustainability agenda organisations are engaging with, and the drivers that are bringing issues to the forefront of business.

Despite two-thirds of businesses (60%) reporting that sustainability policies are integrated into their business effectively, 78% cited corporate image as the main driver for doing so, closely followed by an increase in regulation (77%). This suggests a ‘box-ticking’ approach to sustainability instead of businesses embracing and investing in longer-term practices and the advantages of ‘spending to save’.

In the face of ambitious sustainability targets forecast over the coming years and increasing demands of regulation forcing energy and waste issues further up the corporate agenda, the survey says that there also remains too much of a ‘short-term’ view among senior executives and board-level who are choosing instead to focus on ROI of a few years versus the longer-term.

Further, the findings reveal that reporting is not done effectively enough and that sustainability measurement tools that are available are not being used correctly, or utilised to their full extent, resulting in a lack of evidence-based ROI.

Gareth Tancred, chief executive of BIFM, commented: “It is encouraging to see that over half of businesses we engaged with are imbedding sustainability into the heart of their business practices. However, it is concerning to see that this is being driven primarily by corporate image and legislative requirements versus a desire to want to be a better and more sustainable business.”

 

Picture credit: © Olivier Le Moal | Dreamstime.com
 

Coca-Cola as a medical supplies deliverer? One of its community programs, Project Last Mile, at first sounds odd as the company is one of the world’s most recognized brands, with its red and white logos emblazoned everywhere from mega-city centers to the tiniest rural outposts. Coke’s 100+ year history of prominence is as impressive as it is exasperating to its critics. And its reputation and stature in the marketplace allow it to attract some of the best talent.

But some of that talent wants more than a line on a CV to complement that MBA diploma. More employees, especially newer ones joining the workforce, want to work for an organization that takes sustainability and social responsibility seriously.

To that end, Project Last Mile leverages the company's vast distribution network to increase and improve the delivery of medical supplies to 10 African countries by 2019.

The project has already started in Ghana and Tanzania. Partnering with national and local governments, the initiative takes advantage of Cola-Cola’s prowess in supply chain, distribution and marketing. Other organizations, including Yale’s Global Health Leadership Institute, Accenture and Global Environment and Technology foundation, work with Coke and government officials to procure and distribute medicines to rural areas. But this is more than just about handing out meds. Professionals working on the project advise local health workers on how to forecast future demands for medicines and vaccines. Workers also learn how to maintain cold chain equipment property for the particular medical supplies.

According to a local Tanzania health official, Last Mile has resulted in the increased availability of medicines by as much as 30 percent since the program launched in 2010. Over 5,500 health clinics in total have benefited to date.

The next country in the project’s crosshairs is Mozambique, announced when Coca-Cola agreed to expand Project Last Mile at the cost of US$21 million.

This project is another example of how companies can embark on a corporate social responsibility platform using tools already at their disposal. Rather than cut a check to a charity or try to rally the corporate troops for a volunteer day, Project Last Mile allows employees to do community work while incorporating the skills they need for their day-to-day jobs. Other companies have launched similar initiatives. Ford Motor Co. has used its vehicles and technology to assist in the delivery of health care services in India. Cisco has contributed its video communications technologies to Jordan’s government in order to link urban medical specialists to patients in distant rural areas.

Coca-Cola’s investment in rural African health care will not silence its critics who are wary of the company’s, and that of its competitors’, impacts on issues related to water consumption and of course, on nutrition. But programs such as Project Last Mile offer far more benefit than posing as a purveyor of “healthy living”—and can help improve the company’s branding and reputation.

Image credit: Coca-Cola Press Center

Leon Kaye has lived in Abu Dhabi for the past year and is on his way back to California. Follow him on Instagram and Twitter.

Employee engagement has been a hot topic in the sustainability space this year -- and for good reason. Attracting, engaging and retaining top talent has caught up to — if not surpassed — motives like cost savings as the driving factor influencing companies to embrace sustainability goals.

To put it simply: More and more employees are asking companies about their sustainability programs, and, even in a sluggish economy, some may be hesitant to work for a company that hasn't identified sustainability as a priority.

While the pressure is coming from all angles, research shows the younger generation is leading the charge: A recent PwC study found that more than half of recent college graduates are seeking a company that has corporate social responsibility (CSR) values that align with their own, and 56 percent would consider leaving a company that didn’t have the values they expected.

Building on this research, cloud-based engagement platform WeSpire (formerly known as Practically Green) recently released the results of a five-year research study that shows the influence millennials have in organizations stepping up their employee engagement action.

The findings are intriguing: In response to employee demand, particularly from millennials, a growing number of employers are adopting an official engagement policy on sustainability. This upward trend was especially pronounced from 2011 to 2014, where the prevalence of an official employee sustainability engagement policy nearly doubled: from 17 percent in 2011 to 30 percent in 2014.

"People are realizing that these are not 'nice-to-have' programs," Susan Hunt Stevens, founder and CEO of WeSpire, told Triple Pundit. "They drive the bottom line and the top line of business."

Despite this significant uptick, more than 50 percent of employees would like to see their employer’s stance change on employee sustainability efforts, with millennials leading all age groups. It's worth noting that this figure is down from a high of 67 percent in 2011, but even in 2014, 46 percent of respondents reported that their employer does not have an official policy at all.

The business-as-usual response may be something to the tune of: So what? But engaging employees is proving to be more and more crucial to business success: In a 2012 report that compiled 263 research studies across 192 companies, Gallup found that companies in the top quartile for engaged employees, compared with the bottom quartile, had 22 percent higher profitability, 10 percent higher customer ratings, 28 percent less theft and 48 percent fewer safety incidents. In a recent blog post on Triple Pundit, Gwen Migita, VP of sustainability and community affairs for Caesars Entertainment, drew a direct link between customer loyalty and employee engagement in sustainability programs.

Sustainability and the state of employee engagement

That's great and all, but the fact remains that most employees are not engaged in their work. According to Gallup surveys, 52 percent of employees were "not engaged" in 2012. (Sounds pretty similar to those WeSpire sustainability numbers, doesn't it?).

To make matters worse, a shocking 18 percent of employees are "actively disengaged" from their work. As Hunt Stevens puts it, "Sustainability engagement programs are very effective in engaging employees." So, companies looking to reap the benefits of an engaged workforce may want to look more closely at sustainability engagement programs before shrugging them off.

In many cases, such programs can not only inspire engagement, but also drive behavior change in employees outside the workplace -- making an even bigger difference for the planet and putting a human face on a company's sustainability initiatives outside of its four walls.

One example Hunt Stevens provided is the WeSpire Drought Busters project, created in response to the ongoing drought in the Southwest. Through the project, offices are challenged to reduce water use by 10 percent, and employees are encouraged to do the same at home. WeSpire partner companies in California, Arizona, Nevada and Oregon are already participating in the project, which has also garnered interest from organizations in Australia and Israel, Hunt Stevens said. What seems like a simple idea saved more than 5 million gallons of water in only eight weeks.

"This is the perfect example of using the workplace as a way to inspire behavior change around a certain topic," Hunt Stevens told Triple Pundit. "Employees realize that if they're doing this at work, they can also save money and resources by doing the same at home." Employees engaged in such programs at home and at work are also more likely to tell their friends what they're up to, Hunt Stevens noted -- an attractive fringe benefit for companies from a marketing perspective.

Millennials, HR and making your program a success

The link between the Human Resource (HR) function and sustainability continues to expand, but WeSpire's findings show there's still plenty of work to be done. While the percentage of employees who view HR as the main sustainability advocate doubled from 2011 to 2014 (from 5 percent to 10 percent), that still leaves 90 percent of HR departments that aren't viewed as a driver of sustainability action.

This represents an enormous potential for growth, Hunt Stevens said, and HR departments may learn a great deal by observing the preferences of the younger generation -- especially if a company hopes to use its sustainability commitments to attract and retain top talent. One of the more intriguing findings from WeSpire's "State of Employee Engagement" study is how interested millennials are in the sustainability activities of not just their company, but also their colleagues.

"Employees see sustainability as social," the report's authors write. In fact, 65 percent of respondents said they want to learn more about what their co-workers are doing. This finding persists throughout nearly all age groups -- from millennials to Baby Boomers -- but is much stronger in the millennial generation, as high as 75 percent.

Hunt Stevens draws an interesting parallel between these numbers and millennials' comfort with social media. What comes along with social media engagement, she said, is the sentiment that: "I can learn from my peers just as much as I can learn from experts."

To that end, greater transparency and communication surrounding sustainability programs can drive greater participation and engagement -- ensuring that the resources a company spends on establishing these programs don't go to waste. Things like Green Teams, friendly competitions, awards and bonuses have proven especially successful, Hunt Stevens said, and are gaining in popularity as a result.

"Work is a very powerful social network," she told us. "People are inherently influenced by social norms ... and transparency can be a big motivator."

The bottom line

We can go on about surveys and statistics until the cows come home, but the fact of the matter is that the ability to attract and retain top talent is -- and always has been -- crucial to long-term success.If more up-and-comers are asking about sustainability, that's a pretty big motivator for companies to take it seriously. Those that engage employees now will reap environmental, social and financial benefits for years to come.

"The biggest thing the survey helps to enforce is: A company that thrives into the future is a company that recognizes sustainability and CSR as a core part of the business," Hunt Stevens concluded. "Getting sustainability into a company's DNA and part of its core operating strategy ... the data is showing that's critical."

Images courtesy of WeSpire

Based in Philadelphia, Mary Mazzoni is a senior editor at TriplePundit. She is also a freelance journalist who frequently writes about sustainability, corporate social responsibility and clean tech. Her work has appeared in the Philadelphia Daily News, the Huffington Post, Sustainable Brands, Earth911 and the Daily Meal. You can follow her on Twitter @mary_mazzoni.

David Bradley, owner of The Atlantic, recently interviewed PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi at the Aspen Ideas Festival, and she gave some frank answers to his questions about 'having it all' that coincide more with Anne-Marie Slaughter than Sheryl Sandberg. As in, work/life balance? At the c-suite level, there isn't any. "You know, stay-at-home mothering was a full-time job. Being a CEO for a company is three full-time jobs rolled into one. How can you do justice to all? You can't," Nooyi said.

Interestingly, Anne-Marie Slaughter herself was in the audience at the time, and Nooyi said she was a big fan of her Atlantic piece, Why Women Still Can't Have It All. In it, Slaughter talks about her decision to pull back from a high-powered career in Washington, D.C. to return to Princeton University to teach and spend more time with her family. Slaughter believes that it isn't a lack of ambition that holds women back, but a lack of workplace policies that could make work more balanced for everyone, not just employees with children.

Nooyi sums up the conflicts that so many women are facing today.

...The biological clock and the career clock are in total conflict with each other. Total, complete conflict. When you have to have kids you have to build your career. Just as you're rising to middle management your kids need you because they're teenagers, they need you for the teenage years. And that's the time your husband becomes a teenager too, so he needs you (laughing). They need you too. What do you do? And as you grow even more, your parents need you because they're aging. So we're screwed. We have no... we cannot have it all.

Nooyi shares some universal motherhood guilt stories about missing mother coffee sessions at her daughter's school, when her daughter would tell Nooyi about all the other mothers that were there. Because the coffees were at 9 a.m. on Wednesdays, she could rarely attend.

The first few times I would die with guilt. But I developed coping mechanisms. I called the school and I said, 'Give me a list of mothers that are not there.' So when she came home in the evening she said, 'You were not there, you were not there.'

And I said, 'Ah ha, Mrs. Redd wasn't there, Mrs. So and So wasn't there. So I'm not the only bad mother.'

You know, you have to cope, because you die with guilt. You just die with guilt.

How does Nooyi cope? Nooyi, Sandberg and Slaughter all credit their spouses with playing a big part in their respective family dynamics, and Nooyi advocates getting help from [extended] family and even people in the office. When Nooyi was traveling, her receptionist would field calls from her younger daughter and, after asking the requisite questions, was able to give her permission to play Nintendo per Nooyi's rules. "So it's seamless parenting. But if you don't do that, I'm serious, if you don't develop mechanisms with your secretaries, with the extended office, with everybody around you, it cannot work," Nooyi said.

Despite their success at work and the impact they are having on many lives, all three women express reservations about missing time with their children and the impact it has on them. Travel demands and long hours were the most serious culprits. "We plan our lives meticulously so we can be decent parents. But if you ask our daughters, I'm not sure they will say that I've been a good mom. I'm not sure," Nooyi said.

So how do you balance work and life? Widespread flexible workplace policies don't seem to be going into effect, although some claim increased employee loyalty and productivity due to instituting such policies. So most employees still face the daily conflict of how to manage both work and a fulfilling life outside work, while many workplaces seem to still value office face time and long hours. Will things ever change? The work/life balance debate continues on.

Image credit: Penn State. Flickr creative commons license.

As airline companies compete to be the No. 1 customer choice for flying the skies, the adoption of environmental responsibility standards is becoming much more prevalent.

From curbing water usage, to better management of air traffic systems, to encouraging passengers to share a can of soda (and you thought they were just being cheap), the breadth of initiatives companies are trying out to reduce their footprint elicits greater accountability within the $708 billion dollar airlines industry.

The latest company coming to the table with rather unique plans to help cut the nearly 2 percent global carbon emissions rates produced by the aviation industry is none other than Southwest Airlines. Having cracked the top 100 in Newsweek's annual green company rankings this year, Southwest is demonstratively making good on its commitment to pursue triple-bottom-line growth in the name of environmental stewardship and global citizenship.

Through its Evolve campaign, Southwest designed a large-scale retrofit of its entire fleet to enhance customer comfort and improve overall fuel efficiency. Approximately 80,000 leather seat covers were replaced with durable and environmentally-responsible materials that lighten the load of the plane by a whopping 600 pounds — a number that the company reports will translate into significant fuel savings and subsequent carbon emissions.

In a recent interview with Triple Pundit, Marilee McInnis, senior manager of culture and communications for Southwest, said the airline is seeking opportunities to source new materials, overhaul its fleet, and reduce consumption and fuel costs in the process.

Repurpose with purpose

Once the leather was out and the eco-materials were in, Southwest still had one problem to address: Where to send all of those leather seats — 43 acres of material in total — if landfill is not an option.

The process of upcycling the leather, or converting waste materials into products of greater value, provided Southwest Airlines with a unique opportunity — albeit a challenging one considering the abundance of materials.

“We looked for over a year ... for partner organizations. We’ve learned how difficult it is to upcycle corporate waste,” McInnis told Triple Pundit. “It truly is rather difficult. It brought to light that we as a society don’t think about the end result. Upcycling is a whole new ball game. It has been a tremendous learning opportunity.”

In spite of being met with several challenges to make use of its waste materials, Southwest landed an opportunity to leave a positive impact on communities around the globe.

One example is its recent introduction of LUV Seat: Repurpose with Purpose, a multi-phase sustainability program that partners with social enterprises in Nairobi, Kenya, the Republic of Malawi and the United States, to produce goods that create opportunities for training and employment while preventing additional waste.

“The Evolve redesign was a major milestone in supporting our sustainability goals,” Bill Tiffany, vice president of supply chain management at Southwest Airlines, said in a press statement. “But we didn’t want to stop there — with the pilot of LUV Seat in Nairobi, Malawi, and the United States, we’re embarking on a new vision of social impact through training, job creation and ultimately product donation. We look forward to identifying additional partners through a call to action for our employees, customers and the general public to share their ideas of what we should do with the remaining leather.”

In its initial multi-year campaign, the Southwest LUV Seat program will be used in connection with the following organizations:

• In Nairobi, Kenya, the project’s pilot location, SOS Children’s Villages Kenya, Alive & Kicking, Masaai Treads and Life Beads Kenya will use the excess leather to produce goods for distribution to local community groups.


• TeamLift, a U.S. organization supporting education and healthcare for women and children in sub-Saharan Africa, will develop a leather-works training program to teach young women important entrepreneurial skills while generating proceeds to support the program.


• In the U.S., LooptWorks, an apparel and accessories brand that rescues premium excess materials to design and produce sustainable, limited-edition products, will upcycle LUV Seat leather into high-quality goods as part of Southwest’s celebration of the end of the Wright Amendment in Dallas.

Call to conversation

Southwest’s new initiatives are laying the stage for thought leadership in corporate waste disposal among competitors: In the current landscape, most businesses are not set up to upcycle corporate waste. To encourage the shift in thinking, McInnis offers a simple question to spur internal conversations within companies as they consider the after-life of their supply chain outputs: Is there something else we can do with this? 

Sherrell Dorsey is social impact branding and communications strategist, social entrepreneur and advocate for environmental, social and economic equity in underserved communities. Visit Sherrell atwww.sherrelldosey.com and follow her on Twitter and Instagram @sherrell_dorsey.

By Meghna Tare

Not a day goes by without coming across an article or blog on water scarcity. We have reached a tipping point where we need to monetize and assign a dollar value to a natural resource like water -- without which we cannot survive. We live on the water planet: 75 percent of Earth’s surface is covered by water. Yet fresh water is scarce. Aristotle and other philosophers were right on the mark when they said, “What is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it!"

Laws of physics dictate that water cannot simply vanish from the earth. But the water scarcity problem is global and serious. Without introducing the impact of climate change on the water resource, the water scarcity problem influenced by the increasing population and fears of food security is dominating the policy- and decision-maker's agenda. Even after investing some $400 billion in water supply over the past century, the United States, with so much innovation and technology at its feet, faces a shortage that has no easy remedy. The Golden state and Lone Star states are forced to acknowledge this issue in the face of the existing drought.

The problem persists because water is so undervalued. According to Fortune, New York City charges residential consumers $3.37 per cubic meter; Chicago is $1.46; and Miami is $1.15. But the residential impact on water scarcity is minimalistic with only 8 percent usage, meaning water scarcity cannot be linked to the usage in kitchen or bathroom. According to the U.N., 70 percent of the global water supply is consumed in agricultural production. When farmers have to buy water on the spot market, it is sold in acre-feet and a lot cheaper than the municipal water.

The second-largest consumer is industry, with a total of 22 percent. For business, water scarcity is a far more pressing problem than climate change or managing GHG emissions. The marginal cost of water is rising. Companies are acknowledging that it can affect not only their business strategy and insurance costs, but also their rating in the area of corporate social responsibility (CSR).

Ford’s water stewardship initiatives, for example, has invested millions of dollars in wastewater treatment and rainwater harvesting and purification projects around assembly plants in water-scarce regions of India, South Africa and South China. SABMiller understand that their profitability depends on the responsible use of water. They have invested millions of dollars to conserve and improve its own water supplies, including $6 million to upgrade pipes and other equipment at one of its plants in Tanzania affected by deteriorating water quality. Roughly 90 percent of the water used, which ranges from 61 to 180 liters per liter of beer goes for crop cultivation. In 2010, the company used 731 hectaliters of water for production.

One could argue that the answer to water scarcity is to price water. The idea of treating water as a commodity like oil or gold might seem disturbing on its face. Access to clear water ought to be a human right and the U.N. supported this by passing a resolution in 2010. Environmental economists suggest applying the free market force -- Adam Smith’s “The Invisible Hand” speaks to this issue -- allocate a certain amount of water for everyone for free (or almost no cost) and have a free market for the rest.

China, with 19 percent of the world population and only 7 percent access to freshwater, is taking a leap into the pricing tool. The government announced earlier this year that it would roll out a wide reaching program in which the affluent urban consumers would pay higher for access to water. San Diego recently implemented a tiered pricing system as well. Australia has established a cap-and-trade system similar to the one used for carbon tax to curb GHG emissions, which is pushing industry leaders to conserve water and invest in water-saving projects.

Craig Childs, in his book "The Secret Knowledge of Water," writes: “There are two easy ways to die in desert: thirst and drowning." If one is thirsty in the middle of the desert, the knowledge of economics and free market does not help. Finding water might be possible; purchasing it is just a mirage!

Time will tell whether water pricing will make a dent in the global water crisis? Companies like Coca-Cola, SAB Miller, Merck and Nestle are joining hands with local communities, nonprofit groups and local governments and investing in water conservation efforts even with the market price of water near zero. It is critical for them from the point of view of supply dependability and reputation.

In my view, we should focus our efforts on the agriculture industry. Use of innovation and technology like drip irrigation, education in water saving techniques, and better pricing structure can provide rational incentives. Paul Hawken in his book "Natural Capitalism" cites the example of California’s San Joaquin Valley: The Broadview Water District set a 1989 water intensity target at 10 percent below its 1986-1988 average for crops and enforced a stiff surcharge on excess water use. As a result, water use per acre fell by 17 percent and total drainwater by 25 percent. A 1990-1991 survey in Oregon showed that a consultation saved 10 to 25 percent of farmers' water -- or twice that amount in some cases -- just through awareness and better management.

Whenever one is faced with two different paths, each with its certainties and unknowns. You could always take the path less travelled, but the cardinal rule in strategic planning is to take a path that allows you to shift to the other path if your initial decision should prove wrong. The solution to water scarcity is largely in the hands of governments, not companies, because it requires policies such as better regulations, access to water for agriculture, innovation and efficiency. Agriculture is responsible for about twice as much of total U.S. water withdrawals as all industry, buildings and mining combined. We have to have to apply systems thinking approach to this problem -- everything is part of the puzzle. Increasing population, food security and water scarcity are all interrelated and interdependent.

As futurist, Peter Schwartz advises in his book "The Art of the Long View": “We should choose the option that gives us the most options in the future."

Image credit: Flickr/fotografer

Meghna is the Director of Sustainability for University of Texas at Arlington where she has initiated and spearheaded many successful cross functional sustainability projects related to policy implementation, buildings and development, green procurement, transportation, employee engagement, waste management, GRI reporting, and carbon management. She is a TEDx UTA speaker, was featured as Women in CSR by TriplePundit, has done various radio shows on sustainability, and is an MBA Candidate in Sustainable Management at the Presidio Graduate School. She has a sunny and positive attitude about life and all of its adventures. She enjoys traveling, hiking, reading, and building relationships with friends and co-workers.

You can connect with her on LinkedIn or follow her on Twitter @meghnatare.

Safeway, the second-largest supermarket chain in North America, is making progress toward its environmental goals, according to its sixth annual sustainability report released last week.

One of the chain's most notable targets is to eliminate 1 billion paper and plastic bags in its stores by 2015 -- and it has already eliminated more than 300 million plastic and paper bags. Safeway is also halfway toward the goal of sourcing of all of its fresh and frozen seafood from either sustainable sources or sources making credible improvements by 2015.

Additionally, Safeway has a goal of producing zero waste across all of its operations. (To qualify as zero waste, a facility has to recycle or divert at least 90 percent of materials that would have been sent to landfills.) A total of nine of its 13 distribution centers and nine of its 20 U.S. manufacturing and food processing plants have already achieved zero waste.

Taking things a step further, two of the grocer's California distribution centers, Santa Fe Springs and El Monte, haven't had a trash pickup since. The two facilities combined are almost 2 million square feet and serve over 270 stores.

Water efficiency projects conserve use

Safeway’s headquarters are based in California, a state experiencing one of its worst droughts on record. So, naturally, the supermarket chain thinks conserving water is important. It has saved over 1.2 million gallons of water by using water cooling tower technology installed at four distribution centers. This year, Safeway is in the process of installing aerators on the water faucets in its stores to reduce water use.

Another way the company conserves water is through employee education programs: Colorful signs are used to remind employees to change their behaviors and encourage them to “conserve water.”

Green building is key

Green building is a key aspect of Safeway’s sustainability program: In 2009, it opened its first LEED Gold-certified store in Santa Cruz, California. Two more stores achieved LEED Gold certification in 2013, bringing the total to 10 LEED-certified stores. The LEED-certified stores share certain attributes that include water-efficient landscaping and features such as flow-control plumbing fixtures that need limited water.

Renewable energy powers some Safeway stores

Solar power in 35 Safeway stores saved 8.3 million kilowatt hours in 2013, the report notes. Safeway added 13 solar power systems to U.S. stores last year, with each system generating about 20 percent of the stores's energy needs.

Solar power is not the only renewable energy used by the retailer: Safeway is one of the first U.S. retailers to install on-site, utility-grade wind turbines. Its distribution center in Tracy, California has two 1-megawatt wind turbines, which generated around 2.1 million kilowatt hours of electricity in 2013.

Greening its fleet

Safeway also recycles used cooking oil from stores in the California and Northwest divisions into biodiesel for its truck fleets. This reduces the amount of conventional diesel used to power trucks, thus reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Biodiesel is not the only way it cuts GHG emissions from its fleet: Safeway is currently testing five trucks that run on liquefied natural gas, which produces 26 percent less GHG emissions than diesel, at its Vons distribution center in Southern California.

Image credit: Wikipedia

Editor's Note: An earlier version of this post claimed Safeway planned to entirely eliminate the use of plastic and paper bags in its stores. The post has been updated to correct this inaccuracy. 

The supply chain was rated by consumer goods and retail executives as the number one challenge for their companies in the latest Global Top of Mind Survey by the Consumer Goods Forum and KPMG International. The survey polled nearly 500 C-suite and senior executives globally.

Indeed, 38% of executives cited supply chain management as their main challenge and 42% placed supply chain management at the top of their list for increased investment over the next 12 months, while 45% of executives said speed and agility is their top priority for improving the supply chain

A significant number of consumer goods and retail leaders also indicated the importance of corporate social responsibility in their plans for the next 12 months through transparency and environmental considerations.

Access the full report here.
 

Sustainable packaging has come a long way over a generation. Long ago companies such as Walmart (with Hillary Clinton was on its board) started to tackle wasteful packaging — as in the cardboard boxes that encased deodorant sticks that were ... already encased in plastic. What was once dismissed a “green” gimmick started to make business sense as companies realized excess packaging meant heavier shipments, more wasted fuel and of course, less profit.

So while companies are getting smarter about packaging, waste is still an issue. I saw it myself over the past year, living in a city with almost no recycling. I would stash boxes and plastic under the kitchen sink, hoping it would somehow recycle on its own as I couldn’t stand the thought of pitching what could have otherwise been recycled into the rubbish bin. And now more consumers are becoming aware of the waste they generate and are putting pressure on companies to be more proactive about their waste.

To that end, an article by Bharath Satya Y in Packaging Digest suggests companies cannot ignore the problems of wasteful packaging anymore, as consumers either want better materials used or insist on having more disclosure about the materials used to wrap and store their products.

Companies have already responded in kind. Much of the heavy lifting in sustainable packaging has occurred behind the scenes, where significant impact can be made. Innovations in shipping containers, for example, helps reduce the waste generated by wooden pallets, plastic crates and that annoying plastic stretch film. And consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies, which have long been notorious for the excess waste their products create, are hopping on the bandwagon. Procter and Gamble, for example, committed to more “zero-waste” factories, and Unilever has embarked on a similar agenda while saving millions of Euros annually.

The real challenge, however, will be tackling that waste once all those disposable razors, bottles of mouthwash, cardboard boxes of soaps and crinkly plastic bags of processed food leave the factory: Recycling is only one part of a solution. Consumers are not quite ready to take their empty toothpaste tubes to the local drugstore for a refill — at the same time, many of these companies are skirting the issue of what happens to their products once they have been consumed.

And those challenges present companies an opportunity to prove to consumers that they are innovative. At a time where just about every product on the market is commoditized, packaging presents a way to stand out in the crowd. A couple of companies leading the way are Dell and REI, which have either used more sustainable materials for their packaging and/or have eliminated the number of components — the latter a particular benefit for customers who are weary of “wrap rage.”

Waste diversion efforts still have a long ways to go before we can even get close to a more circular economy, which would be ideal in a world that is increasingly smothered with garbage. Consumer habits will be hard to change in what has become a disposable society — but food and CPG companies are in part responsible for helping us get out of this mess, as they have succeeded with their relentless marketing of these products for generations.

So watch for companies to transform packaging from an afterthought to a central role within a product’s performance and brand. We’ve reached a point where our teeth can’t get any whiter, our clothes any softer or hair any shinier. But we are more curious about how our packaging can be lighter, use less petroleum or trees, and avoid entombment in the landfill. The results will not only enhance brands’ reputations, but also spur more innovation within the packaging industry and hopefully benefit the planet, too.

Image courtesy of www.how2recycle.info

Leon Kaye has lived in Abu Dhabi for the past year and is on his way back to California. Follow him on Instagram and Twitter.