Search

UK pension funds and asset man-agement companies including British Airways Pension Fund, Legal & General, Scottish Widows Investment Partnership and Aviva Investors could potentially have £37.3bn (€45bn) collectively invested in ‘land grabs’ worldwide, according to a new report from by Friends of the Earth (FoE).

Titled ‘What’s Your Pension Funding? How UK Institutional Investors Finance the Global Land Grab’, the 40-page report is claimed to be the first time that UK pension funds and asset management companies have been linked directly - via their investments - to global firms either known or alleged to be involved in cases of land grabbing from communities in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

The practice of land grabbing - whereby wealthy businesses acquire large tracts of cheap unused land to grow crops for fuel and for other industries - can also see the rights of the affected people and communities infringed. It has resulted in families being forcibly kicked off their land they use to grow food - with no compensation - and in some cases are lives lost.

Samuel Lowe, FoE’s Land Grabs Campaigner and one of the report’s three co-authors, commenting said: “Our future retirement funds are often being secured at the expense of the poor and powerless through widespread land grabbing. And, in some cases our pensions are actually under threat of being wiped-out due to the risky nature of large-scale land acquisition deals.”

Lowe called for “stringent international laws” by the Government to rule out all of the impacts associated with land grabbing and asserted that: “UK investors must stop funding companies linked to this scandal.” Blackrock, the asset manager, holds by far the most shares and bonds in the 23 high-risk and land grab associated companies, with total holdings of £9.85bn, followed by Legal & General with £8.739bn.

FoE is also calling for the UK Government to examine the role played by pension funds and asset management firms in funding these land grabs, and urged institutional investors to stop investing in companies - either linked to or associated with large-scale land acquisitions - until there are UK laws to rule out the wide range of social and environmental impacts of land grabs.

Furthermore, the campaigning group is pushing for Governments to “urgently” bring ‘UN Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests’ into legislation “with the explicit aim of ruling out land grabs in their own, and in other countries.”

Listing various case studies, the report points to many of these investments in companies involved in large-scale land acquisitions made by UK pension funds that may be fuelling and financing an “unprecedented global land grab”, potentially violating human rights, destroying local food security, forests and sensitive habitats.

With land grabbing increasingly placing hundreds of poor communities at risk of violence and displacement, the report argued: “For investors this presents substantial ethical, operational and financial risks.

“Voluntary codes such as the UN Global Compact, UN Principles for Responsible Investment and the World Bank Principles on Responsible Agriculture Investment are no guarantee that land investments are not causing significant harm. Investors must look beyond voluntary codes of conduct for a true assessment of risks and be more demanding of the companies they invest in.” 

The £6.19m Guinness Alternative Energy C fund surpassed its peers in the UK Registered funds sector in the year to 31 May 2014 with a +22.07% cumulative return versus less than spectacular past three- and five-year performances of -14.37%/180th and -22.95%/152th, respectively. Craton Capital Renewable, Alternative & Sustainable Resources A fund was runner up on the past one-year horizon (+19.90%), reversing rankings on the previous month’s Morningstar analysis with the £62.03m Triodos Sustainable Pioneer K Retail fund (+19.53%). The £73.04m Premier Ethical A Income fund, which ranked fourth top over the last 12 months with +19.01%, posted a stellar +110.83/10th rank over the last five years.

SUNARES just shaded it from Iveagh Wealth EUR X Acc fund (-15.23%) to take the sector’s wooden spoon over the past one year with -15.74%/204th (-57.79%/185th over past three years).

MAP Clean Technology Fund I beat Economie Durable A fund by a country mile for the past 12 months posting +133.65%, although the latter was a consistent performer over both one- and three-year time horizons with respective performances of +66.47% and +71.47% - ranking it second top both times. LSF Asian Solar & Wind A1 fund was in third place this time with +49.93% over the past 12 months, but seriously lagged with -14.31%/1,004th over three years. FIP Développement Durable A A/I fund bottom ranked out of 1,100 funds at -33.09% over the past year (-36.66%/1,010th over three). Triodos Vastgoedfonds ranked second from bottom over the past year and placed 1,012th over past three (-39.42%).

Across the US Mutual funds sector, which displayed the best peer group average at +94.25% over the last five years, the $16.48m Firsthand Alternative Energy fund outclassed rivals on a past one-year horizon with +43.34% versus a lacklustre -2.83%/172th rank over the past three years and +9.41%/158th rank over past five, respectively. The $24.32m Guinness Atkinson Alternative Energy fund was second top producing +34.81% over the past year versus -20.56%/176th over the past three-years horizon and -3.48%/185th over last five. The $629.12m Eventide Gilead N fund ranked fourth top on a past one-year view (+27.74%) and was No.1 over three years (+67.83%) and a mighty +165.82% (4th) over five years. Epiphany FFV Latin America A bottom ranked here among 192 funds on -2.77% for the past year.

The UK Individual Pensions sector posted the best peer group average over one- and three-year periods at +27.37% and +38.43%, respectively. 

InterContinental Hotels Group (IHG) may be an internationally recognised hotel brand but its business model is actually asset light in that it only directly owns 9 hotels worldwide. However, within the IHG portfolio there are in fact 4,700 establishments. Kate Gibson, head of CR and sustainability, tells Ethical Performance about the challenge of instigating CR policy and change in such a multi-layered business.

How did you get interested in the field?
I joined IHG eight years ago on the business strategy side and joined the CR team in 2011. But it’s been a subject I’ve been passionate and interested all my life. I was in the environmental club at school, have worked as a volunteer and was also involved in doing pro bono work as a management consultant.

How important is CR to IHG?
The CR function was set up at IHG in 2006 and is a strategic issue for the company. It’s no bolt-on here. It’s built on the foundation of shared value: what’s good for the business, should be good for the community and good for the environment.

What’s your approach to CR?
Our starting point is doing a small amount of things and doing them well. They also have to be directly related to the business. What we’re saying to our hotels is: this will help your business, there is no trade-off. We have three specific programmes that are founded on our vision of shared value: Green Engage, the IHG Academy and IHG Shelter in a Storm.

Give us more details about the three programmes.
Energy is the number two cost for the hotel business model. This can drive a hotel’s top line so Green Engage is our online sustainability system which tells hotels what they can do to be a ‘green’ hotel. It gives them the means to conserve resources and save money – by measuring, managing and reporting on their hotel energy, water and waste consumption, as well as benchmarking and the ability to create action plans to track progress. There’s no trade off in taking actions associated with Green Engage. It can help our hotels achieve energy savings of up to 25%, roughly $90,000 for an average hotel. Over 2,600 hotels are now enrolled in it.

Staff is the number one cost for a hotel, it is a people business after all. So IHG Academy is all about a sustainable talent pipeline. IHG Academy provides local people with skills development and employment opportunities in one of the world’s largest hotel companies. Within a common framework each IHG Academy is tailored to meet the needs of local communities and hotels. The Academy was pioneered in Greater China and the framework is now globalised.

The IHG Shelter in a Storm programme provides our hotels with guidance on when and how best to respond when disasters occur. The IHG Shelter Fund is a pool of resources built up by fundraising activities throughout the year, allowing us to respond as soon as disaster strikes.

Isn’t the Academy simply a HR tool?
It’s both HR and CR. That’s the shared value network at work. No trade off at all and people are fundamental to our business. That’s why it is so compelling.

Given your business model, how widespread are the programmes?
Currently there are 313 programmes running in 52 countries. And running in hotels of different sizes. Obviously the aim is for all IHG to be involved but like all our programmes, they are not mandated. They need to see the benefits of scale, so we share stories of impact and also the impact data.

How do you try and engage the different layers of the business?
We publicise this via our CR report, our Facebook page, and through case studies. There are lots of opportunities to engage with employees. Success lies in the combination of data and stories. We find that data puts the programme in context. The data is the call to action. We have teams on the ground and operational people to spread the message as well as digitally. We also have IHG Associations which meet regularly and show that ‘we’re all in this together’.

How engaged are people within the IHG family with the IHG brand?
One thing I’ve noticed is how people who work in, for example, a Holiday Inn Express in Mexico say they work for IHG. There is a strong connection to IHG and we want it to bind our people together. It helps found the idea that there are benefits to joining us and shows, in part, the scale of the company.

What’s your biggest challenge?
Working within the layers of the business. We are in a complex business for sure, and that creates challenges but also huge opportunities for making a positive impact. We intend to roll out our programmes in as many hotels as we can. The targets in our sustainability report are our true north.

What’s been one of the biggest changes you’ve seen?
Carbon engagement – that’s really evolved in the hotel sector. It’s changed from guests asking ‘how green are you’ to the more specific: ‘what is the carbon consumption of your room per night?’
The issue has become more mainstream and there’s a lot more interest in this area. Customers have the power to pull and have become part of the decision-making. It will make business move faster on these issues in the sector.

What’s your ambition now?
My long term ambition is for as many of our hotels to use our programmes as possible. What gives me hope, in IHG, is how we generate momentum and how the scale of our company generates more and more momentum. Green Engage is a very good example.  

Roland Pirmez, president, HEINEKEN, Asia Pacific explains why the promotion of responsible drinking is key to the beer giant's sustainable future

One of the most common misconceptions I have come across, at the helm of a beer company, is that it is in our interest as brewers to have people drink more no matter what. In reality, that is hardly the case. HEINEKEN is 150 years old. We recognise that if we want to stay on for another 150 years, we must make it a priority to encourage people to enjoy the consumption of our products responsibly.

The vast majority of consumers does so. However, there is a minority which does not. That is why advocating responsible consumption continues to be a clear and on-going priority in our sustainability journey. We believe we can be more effective in influencing positive drinking behaviour through a proactive engagement of our consumers to develop smart drinking habits and influence their peers to do the same. The Asian beer industry, which is poised to overtake Europe and the Americas as the world’s biggest beer consumer, is experiencing a phenomenal growth story that many international brewers are paying attention to. According to figures from Canadean, the Asia Pacific region is expected to be the largest contributor to global beer growth from 2013 to 2018, accounting for 152 million hectolitres or around 72% of global beer growth.

However, there is more to the beer industry than just a standalone enterprise in the alcoholic beverages sector - its development across the Asia Pacific has been linked to positive growth across many other regional industries such as agriculture, brewing, hospitality, entertaining and retailing, just to name a few. The key reasons cited for the ongoing expansion of the Asian beer appetite is the growth of the continent’s young population and the correlation of alcohol consumption with strong economic growth as well as rising urbanisation of rural communities in the region. Against this backdrop, not only positive opportunities are present for the region, but also risks such as drink driving and underage drinking. And the reaction by most stakeholders is often to limit advertising and marketing, restrict product availability and raise taxes.

However, while some of these measures may impact the overall consumption in a market, they do not have a significant impact on the issue they are intended to address: reducing alcohol-related harm. In reality, the most highly-regulated places also happen to have some of the highest incidence of alcohol abuse. What this shows us is that the root of the cause of alcohol misuse goes beyond the availability of the product under abuse. It is linked to one’s intrinsic attitude towards alcohol, rooted in the habitual behaviour of the user.

The entire industry needs to address this challenge by engaging consumers and retailers on the topic. Indeed, it is making concrete steps in leading the way for a change to take place globally that will have a significant impact on our cause to battle alcohol-related harm. But while we are prepared to invest and do more to combat harmful drinking, at the same time we recognize that we cannot do it alone. We need the enforcement muscle of the governments, regulators and health bodies working alongside us to address this. Through our operating companies in Asia Pacific, we have been engaging in partnerships with other industry organisations, NGOs and even provincial governments.

For example in Singapore, Asia Pacific Breweries Singapore along with the Association of Bartenders and Sommeliers Singapore and its partner, United States-based Health Communications, Inc., launched a leading skills-based training programme to raise the bar for responsible alcohol service in Singapore and the region. The Training for Intervention Procedures (TIPS) programme, which the local Health Promotion Board supports, aims to train practitioners from the local hospitality industry on how to prevent intoxication, underage consumption and drunk driving in venues where alcohol is served.

In Indonesia, PT Multi Bintang Indonesia Tbk has partnered with local retailers since 2011 to promote the message of “21+”, screening consumers to ensure that they are of legal drinking age before they are sold alcoholic beverages. From only 5 Circle K convenience stores working with them at first, it grew to over 270 Circle K and 7-Eleven stores in Indonesia participating in this industry self-regulation.

And in Thailand, Thai Asia Pacific Brewery developed a multi-partnership initiative with provincial governors, Land Transport Offices, police forces and other health and safety-related government agencies and Thai celebrities to spread the word on responsible drinking. The successful campaign in Chiang Rai in 2011 led to further partnerships in Chiang Mai the year after. A total of 12 alcohol testing booths and rest stops were set up in eight districts during the Songkran Festival. Statistics showed that only 1.1 percent of recorded accidents during that period was alcohol-related, and the total number of accidents in Chiang Rai, a key danger area, decreased by 85.6 percent compared with the same period in 2012 – the campaign was a success.
Of course, it will take time to influence attitudes and realise results, but there are encouraging signs.

Ultimately, we believe that the cause of promoting responsible alcohol consumption as well as the education of the harmful use of alcohol is one that needs to be shared across all stakeholders at large – be it the consumer, the retailer, the brewer, the health lobbyist or the regulator.

The opportunity is present for a new type of conversation and collaboration on beer and alcohol. Will all stakeholders embrace this? We strongly hope that the answer is yes. 

The economic argument against taking action on climate change — i.e., "It’s just too expensive!" — is fast becoming passé, with a World Bank report this month noting that policies to cut carbon pollution might actually boost the global economy by up to $2.6 trillion a year.

Yes, that’s trillion!

This is the first time that “climate-smart” project scenarios have been tallied on such a large scale to find out how government actions can boost economic performance and benefit lives, jobs, crops, energy and GDP – as well as emissions reductions to combat climate change.

The 88-page report, "Climate-Smart Development: Adding Up the Benefits of Actions that Help Build Prosperity, End Poverty and Combat Climate Change," focuses on five countries – Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and the United States – plus the European Union. Big benefits will flow by 2030 if that group implements just three sets of policies on clean transportation, energy efficiency in industry and energy efficiency in buildings, the report asserts.

“The annual benefits of just these policies in 2030 include an estimated GDP growth of between $1.8 trillion and $2.6 trillion.” In addition, the report found that “these policies alone would account for 30 percent of the total reduction needed in 2030 to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).” More benefits: these policies avoid 94,000 premature pollution-related deaths and 8.5 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions, the World Bank found. They also would save nearly 16 billion kilowatt-hours of energy, roughly equivalent to taking 2 billion cars off the road.

“Climate change poses a severe risk to global economic stability, but it doesn’t have to be like this,” said World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim. “At the World Bank Group, we believe it’s possible to reduce emissions and deliver jobs and economic opportunity, while also cutting health care and energy costs. This report provides powerful evidence in support of that view.”

In the transportation policy scenario, for example, if the five countries and the EU shifted more travel to public transit, moved more freight traffic off of roads to rails and sea, and improved fuel efficiency, they could save about 20,000 lives a year, avert hundreds of millions of dollars in crop losses, save nearly $300 billion in energy, and reduce pollution emissions by more than four gigatons.

Some of the benefits come from reducing emissions of what are known as short-lived climate pollutants, or SLCPs, the report continues. Black carbon from diesel vehicles and cooking fires, methane from mining operations and landfills, ozone formed when sunlight interacts with emissions from power plants and vehicles, and some hydrofluorocarbons are all SLCPs. “They can damage crops and cause illnesses that kill millions. Reducing these emissions could avoid an estimated 2.4 million premature deaths and about 32 million tons of crop losses a year.” the World Bank said. Unlike CO2, SLCPs do not linger in the atmosphere for centuries but are removed in weeks or years. Stopping these air pollution emissions from entering the atmosphere would by itself help reduce warming and provide time to develop and deploy effective CO2 interventions.

The World Bank’s finding matches that of the recent International Energy Agency (IEA) report, “Energy Technology Perspectives,” according to a ThinkProgress article. The IEA found that an aggressive effort to deploy renewable energy and energy efficiency (and energy storage) to keep global warming below the dangerous threshold of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit/2 degrees Celsius would be staggeringly cost-effective, “resulting in net savings of $71 trillion” by 2050.

It’s becoming clear that addressing climate change on a national and world level is more a matter of political will than concern about the cost. Financial cost is a perilous excuse for inaction.

As the World Bank says, “Thanks to a growing body of research, it is now clear that climate-smart development can boost employment and can save millions of lives.” Smart development policies and projects can also slow the pace of adverse climate changes. “Based on this new scientific understanding, and with the development of new economic modeling tools to quantify these benefits, it is clear that the objectives of economic development and climate protection can be complementary.”

What in the world are we waiting for?

Image credit: Climate-Smart Development report cover via the World Bank

Business leaders are calling on Congress to take action and extend clean energy tax incentives. A total of 302 companies and business associations signed a letter urging Congressional leaders to vote 'yes' and pass the EXPIRE Act, which would extend the tax credits they say “are critical to the continued growth of clean energy technologies.”

Listed among the 62 tax incentives included in the EXPIRE (Expiring Provisions Reform and Efficiency) Act are renewable energy production and investment tax credits that have been seminal in fostering rapid growth in wind, solar, biofuels and other clean renewable energy sources across the U.S. The EXPIRE Act would extend these provisions for an additional year, through Dec. 31, 2015.

The need for stable tax policy

According to the letter to Congressional leaders, “Businesses and investors need stable, predictable federal tax policy to create jobs, invest capital, and deploy pollution-reducing energy technologies. Allowing the lapsed clean energy tax provisions to languish undermines investor confidence and jeopardizes continued economic and environmental benefits.”

Johnson Controls, Berkshire Hathaway's MidAmerican Energy Co., POET, Sherman Williams and Calvert Investments, as well as the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Tooling and Machining Association, the American Association of Port Authorities, the Center for Rural Affairs, the Biotechnology Industry Association and the National Wildlife Federation, signed the letter urging Congressional leaders to pass the EXPIRE Act.

Having passed successfully through the Senate Finance Committee, the EXPIRE Act is awaiting a vote on the Senate floor. The business groups that signed the letter would like to see a vote before the start of the lame-duck session of Congress that will follow the mid-term national elections this November.

Extending the renewable energy tax credit

The renewable energy investment and production tax credits have played a critical role in spurring development and adoption of renewable energy technology, systems, markets and industries. Supporting their call, the letter to Congress states:

“These bipartisan tax provisions have a proven track record of helping scale up production and drive down the cost of clean energy technologies, thereby ensuring that market-ready technologies are deployed to their full potential.

“The nation’s suite of clean energy and energy efficiency tax provisions lower the cost of clean energy and keep the U.S. competitive in the global technology race. They promote economic development, job creation, and a cleaner environment. To continue capturing these benefits it is essential to restore stability in the marketplace by extending the expired provisions through 2015 and by making them retroactive to the beginning of this year.

“Once again, we urge you to quickly restore the expired clean energy and energy efficiency tax provisions. Doing so will help build the economy, create jobs, and deliver a safer, healthier future for our children.”

An audio recording of the of the phone-in press conference announcing business leaders' call on Congress to pass the EXPIRE Act is available online.

* Image credits: 1) GE; 2) AWEA; 3) IRENA

More risk taking, more startup culture, and more genius ideas turned into jobs that solve the perils of global poverty. These are the goals behind a newly minted partnership between Michael Dell and the United Nations to spur innovation, technology and entrepreneurship in the least likely of environments.

Dell will serve as the foundation’s Global Advocate for Entrepreneurship. In this role, he will lead a strategic plan that will focus on four key areas: access to capital, to markets, to talent, and to technology. In short, Dell’s mission boils down to creating Silicon Valley-esque climates in countries and cities that have yet to adopt entrepreneurial cultures but are fertile for growth and opportunity.

At the age of 19, the American businessman turned $1,000 into a venture that to date employs over 100,000 people. As a global entrepreneurship advocate, Dell offers a credible voice for small business ventures that wouldn’t normally have access to a global platform in front of experts, governments and policymakers.

"At this time of economic uncertainty and global challenges, it's more important than ever that the business community work closely with organizations, elected leaders and policymakers to help our global economy grow and prosper," said Michael Dell in a press statement. “I’m honored to accept this position and look forward to championing the growth of entrepreneurs globally.”

Entrepreneurship has always served as a critical function for job creation and prosperity—not government and big business. In fact, in the U.S. alone, small businesses provide 55% of all jobs and 66% of all net new jobs. Pair this statistic with the rise in social impact-based entrepreneurship and we have a recipe for not only job creation, but also for risk-taking entrepreneurs who are betting the advancement of entire social structures on models that produce profits while simultaneously solving major challenges.

Dell’s goals, and the U.N.’s for that matter, aren’t entirely revolutionary—they’re advancing a conversation that has been in effect for quite sometime.

Take for instance Kiva, the world’s very first micro-lending platform that in 2005 leveraged online technology with micro-finance institutions to provide crowdsourced loans to small-scale entrepreneurs with the goal of alleviating poverty.

Similarly, Ashoka, the largest network of social entrepreneurs worldwide, since 1980 has provided start-up financing, professional support services, and connections to a global network across the business and social sectors, and a platform for people dedicated to changing the world.

Defining leadership within the context of the Dell/U.N. partnership will solely rest in their ability to connect to the forward-thinking programming and solutions defined by organizations putting their values into practice, while simultaneously raising the level of consciousness across global governments to create an ecosystem for entrepreneurial advancement and development. We have no doubt that both parties are up to the task.

“Michael has been a risk taker and change maker from the day he built a global company from his college dorm room. Now his company Dell Inc. affects lives of people around the world. We know Michael will bring this same drive and passion to his new role for the U.N. Foundation. He will work to maximize the power of entrepreneurship by helping people support international development and global priorities for growth, prosperity and peace,” said Kathy Calvin, president and CEO of the U.N. Foundation.

Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

Widespread adoption of waste heat recovery (WHR) systems could drive substantial reductions in carbon and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for cement manufacturers, according to a recently released report from the International Finance Corp. (IFC) and the Institute for Industrial Productivity (IIP).

The predominant building material of our times, cement manufacturing requires an inordinate of energy. It also produces an inordinate amount of carbon dioxide and other pollutants. It is estimated that cement manufacturing alone accounts for 5 percent of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions globally.

Prodded by environmental NGOs and government regulatory agencies, cement manufacturers have been on a drive to reduce their CO2 emissions, and they've made significant progress. Looking to add to them, installation of WHR systems “can reduce the operating costs and improve EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization) margins of cement manufacturers some 10-15 percent. According to IFC-IIP's “Waste Heat Recovery for the Cement Sector: Market and Supplier Analysis” report.

Cement and CO2 emissions

Some 3.6 billion metric tons of cement were produced worldwide in 2011, resulting in over 2 billion metric tons of CO2 emissions. That counts the emissions from calcination of limestone, the resulting intermediate stage product known as “clinker,” as well CO2 emissions from the fuels used (mainly coal and gas) to drive the process.

Cement manufacturers have leveraged energy efficiency, alternative fuels or biofuels, and clinker substitution to realize a 16 percent reduction in CO2 missions per metric ton of cement produced from a level of 750 kilograms (kg) CO2 per metric ton, according to the Global CCS (Carbon Capture & Storage) Institute.

Waste heat recovery: Factors for success

From their analysis of cement manufacturing across 11 developing countries, IFC and IIP conclude that WHR technology can be the key for cement manufacturers to realize greater reductions in CO2 emissions, as well as lower operating costs, enhance the security of electricity supplies and improve their market competitiveness.

In “Waste Heat Recovery for the Cement Sector: Market and Supplier Analysis,” IFC and IIP analyze “the current state of WHR technology deployment in developing countries and investigates the success factors in countries where WHR has become widely spread.” The study covers national cement industry sectors spanning 11 nations: Nigeria and South Africa, India and Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey, Brazil and Mexico, and in East Asia, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam.

As the report authors recount, Japanese companies spearheaded the introduction of WHR systems in the cement industry back in the 1980s. WHR technology has improved, diversified and been adopted more widely since. There are over 850 WHR power installations worldwide at present, according to IFC-IIP's count. China, with 739, has the most by far, followed by India, with 26, and Japan, with 24.

Looking to identify the factors that have led to WHR's success in China, the IFC-IIP research team found that a combination of incentives has led to greater adoption. These include tax breaks and revenue generated from the issuance and sales of UN Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) carbon offset credits for clean technology projects.

Also contributing has been the January 2011 enactment of national energy efficiency legislation that required use of WHR on all new clinker lines. Clinker is an intermediate product in the manufacture of cement that is produced when limestone is heated. Heating limestone drives a chemical reaction that releases CO2.

Reinforcing these initiatives, private sector Chinese companies began entering the market. Their entering the market and use of domestic design resources and components drove the capital and installation costs of WHR, the report authors highlight.

Benefits of cement waste heat recovery (WHR)

Electricity bills typically make up as much as 25 percent of a cement factory's total operating costs. Installing WHR systems enables manufacturers to capture heat and make use of heat that otherwise would have been vented to the atmosphere and surrounding environment. IFC and IIP found that cement manufacturers can capture these exhaust gases and use them directly for low-temperature heating, or use them to generate as much as 30 percent of overall cement factory electricity needs.

By deploying WHR-based electricity generation, cement factories not only reduce their purchases from power companies or other in-house electricity sources, it insulates them from volatility in electricity market prices. Furthermore, deploying WHR technology enhances power reliability and improves the plant's overall market competitiveness.

IFC and IIP estimate the potential exists to deploy 1,615 megawatts (MW) and 2,930 MW of WHR across the 11 developing countries surveyed. Improved access to financing would be a key enabler. As the report authors state:

“Cement manufacturers are frequently reluctant to put WHR investments on their balance sheets, especially when project payback period is over two years. While experience with off-balance sheet financing is limited to date, it offers great opportunities for further uptake of WHR.”

All images credit: IFC, IIP, “Waste Heat Recovery for the Cement Sector: Market and Supplier Analysis”

Last October we reported on an effort by JPMorgan Chase & Co. to donate money to the University of Delaware. The financial institution’s generous donation of $17 million wasn’t the reason it was in the news. After all, UD is already home to the JPMorgan Chase Innovation Center, and Delaware has received other donations as well from the institution. But the announcement set off warning bells when it became clear that the donation would be provided to fund a PhD program, and the financial institution would have the right to sit in on candidate selections.

Well, the concept seems to be gaining steam. Earlier this month, the United Negro College Fund (UNCF) announced that it had received a donation of $25 million from Charles and David Koch, otherwise known as the Koch brothers.

According to the Charles Koch Foundation website, the funding was issued jointly by the foundation and Koch Industries. Of the $25 million, $18.5 million will go toward funding scholarship for “exemplary students with a demonstrated financial need” who are seeking to address specific topics related to entrepreneurship. Funding will also support school programs and other auxiliary projects. The remaining $6.5 million will provide general funding for historically black colleges and universities (HCBUs) and the UNCF, with $4 million going toward helping the institutions and students affected by funding shortfalls as a result of the Department of Education’s criteria change to the PARENTS PLUS program.

On the surface, the Koch donation couldn’t come at a better time. The DoE’s changes have had a decimating impact on funding options at HCBUs and scholarships at those schools. So it’s no surprise that the UNCF graciously accepted the offer. According to UNCF President and CEO Michael Lomax, the organization has accepted funding from a wide breadth of organizations, ranging from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to Walter Annenberg. And it should.

But what seems to have been missed in the conversation recently (and there’s been a lot on all sides) is the expectations that go with the donation.

According to Grist writer Brentin Mock, information he received from the UNCF revealed that two Koch Foundation representatives will have seats on scholarship candidate reviews, “along with two UNCF reps and someone from one of UNCF’s partner universities.” He points out that it’s not uncommon for donors to have an interest in seeing personal interests nurtured through such scholarships.

“But given the Koch’s political backgrounds, will they also screen for prospects who’ll serve their agenda?” asks Mock. He also notes that other questions he sent to the UNCF, such as whether the donation was made with the understanding that the reps would be able to participate in on the decision-making committees, and whether there were other criteria to receiving the donation, were never answered (or at least not prior to press time).

What I wonder about is whether all donor organizations that have provided funding at or near these levels, such as the Gates Foundation and Annenberg, will also get to sit in on the next scholarship candidate reviews.

There’s been a lot of talk recently of whether accepting funding from organizations run by individuals accused of supporting initiatives that may have led to voter disenfranchisement was the appropriate step for the UNCF. University of Pennsylvania Prof. Marybeth Gasman notes that the Koch brothers have also been outspoken advocates of Tea Party candidates who “oppose many policies, initiatives and laws that empower African Americans.”

But while the Koch brothers’ politics have certainly drawn a lot of ire and speculation, it seems to me that the criterion that is really a concern is the implied expectation that their representatives should have a role in the candidate evaluations. Giving seats to certain charity representatives based not only on their financial support, but also their negotiating prowess to expect such a privilege is the red flag here. If the Koch brothers, like JPMorgan Chase & Co. have a genuine interest in ensuring good education for America’s next generation of entrepreneurs and financial leaders, then having a coveted role in their selection – and ultimately their philosophical direction – shouldn’t be necessary.

UNCF funding promotion: Elvert Barnes Dillard University, New Orleans, LA: Infrogmation

By Elizabeth Ferruelo

Fixing the education system has long been a national priority — and a national struggle. The U.S. lags behind other developed countries in math and science, and student performance is uneven across states. But the convergence of two new trends is creating reason for cautious optimism.

The Common Core standards, called by the New York Times “the most significant change to American public education in a generation,” have created uniform curricular objectives, which seek to smooth out  the unevenness in education. Second, technology — cheaper hardware and digital tools such as Khan Academy or MOOCs — has opened access to information, professors and resources in ways unimaginable a decade earlier.

While this technology was disrupting most industries, a fragmented market and paper textbooks delayed the entry of new companies, products and ideas into education. But a more fertile market created by the Common Core and digitalization, and futile attempts to convince a publisher to build the curriculum program she needed, prompted teacher-turned-social entrepreneur Eileen Murphy to launch thinkCERCA.

Experience teaching English in Chicago Public Schools (CPS) and working in curriculum design in a central office meant Murphy knew not only what teachers needed, but she could see the larger, more troubling picture. Centralized data revealed student performance decreasing in many cases, pointing to a failure in individualized teaching. At a micro level, she visited 20 blended schools—those integrating online learning in the classroom — and noticed dramatic shortcomings. “The gaping hole was in literacy. We also saw that digital use was isolated – it was not collaborative and there was no teacher involvement.”

Rather than textbooks, thinkCERCA emphasizes critical reasoning and group debate through its dynamic collection of online articles. Students evaluate texts ranging from the Constitution to those by graffiti artist Banksy to learn evidence-based thinking with software that accommodates the multiple learning levels within each classroom. Currently 20,000 students use the product across 100 schools, the majority of which are public and range from campuses with one, shared computer lab to highly blended.

Where there is opportunity, investment follows. In the first quarter of 2014, ed tech startups raised over $500 million, according to TechCruch. Much of this investment has gone towards student-facing digital products like thinkCERCA, according to a Gates Foundation study released earlier this year. And trends suggest the market will continue to grow.

Although thinkCERCA was part of the inaugural class of Impact Engine, a Chicago-based social incubator, there are now more than 15 accelerators around the U.S. dedicated to education. Becoming a social business was a matter of debate at the outset; many suggested a nonprofit structure with free products, but Murphy knew the business model was the better option. “I was worried there wouldn’t be enough philanthropy for us to keep growing, and one of our main missions in developing this technology was…to solve a principals’ problem…For student outcomes to happen quick, the principal had to make a commitment to literacy and personalizing student growth.” Murphy added that the investment in a paid curriculum product carried the obligation to give it a fair try.

Still social entrepreneurship carries its unique set of challenges. “When you’re trying to solve a social problem, people feel a little bit uncomfortable with capitalism.” Murphy continued, “On the one hand you have to convince capitalists that you have a viable business; the flip side is convincing the people whose problem you’re trying to solve that you’re committed to a for-profit venture because it is the best option.”