Search

In Wednesday’s State of the State Address, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced his goal to accelerate the state’s clean tech economy. Central to that strategy is the creation of a $1 billion New York “Greenbank,” a fund that would match public funds with money from the private sector to spark investment in clean energy and other green technologies.

In addition to the Greenbank, Gov. Cuomo announced other initiatives including a plan to increase solar installations for homes and businesses over the next 10 years; an expansion of the state’s electric vehicle (EV) charging stations; and the appointment of a statewide “energy czar.” With the aftermath of Sandy still a searing recent memory, Cuomo’s suggested policies show that government and business have got to work together to solve the long term problems climate change poses.

Details on how New York’s state government will financially support the Greenbank are lacking. Nevertheless, environmental organizations including the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) have applauded the plan. Funds from the bank would be matched with private sector money to offer low cost and lower risk financing for energy efficiency and clean energy projects. New York’s greenbank would be the second in the country; Connecticut launched its version of a greenbank in 2011. As Forbes’ Todd Woody pointed out yesterday, such a finance mechanism for green technology could soon pit New York as a strong rival to California on the green technology front.

Gov. Cuomo also suggested ramping up New York’s solar jobs program at $150 million annually for 10 years. The plan would allow thousands of homeowners and businesses to install solar on their roofs and therefore save money on electricity while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Another initiative that would tackle emissions is the Charge New York program, an investment in an electric car network that would reduce the state’s residents reliance on fossil fuels. According to the NRDC, the plan could lead to as many as 3,000 public and workplace charging stations.

Finally, Gov. Cuomo announced the appointment of Richard Kauffman, a senior advisor to Energy Secretary Stephen Chu, as the state’s “energy czar.” Prior to joining the DOE, Kauffman was CEO of Good Energies, a private equity fund that invests in the energy industry.

As some observers have noted, the real test is whether New York state will actually fund these programs. But so far Gov Cuomo’s administration has scored high marks for other reforms his administration imposed in the two years since he took office. And as it stands this is amongst the most aggressive statewide energy campaign any U.S. state has taken.

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

Image credit: Wikipedia (Pat Arnow)

Even if you’re addicted to Cinnabon there’s not really a good reason to schlep to the local mall unless it’s within walking distance. But then that’s not what malls are all about, right?

Last month in the Atlantic Cities blog, Jeff Jordan considered the “Death of the American Shopping Mall” and he has the charts to back up his thesis.

Simply put, America has too many malls, too much retail space in those malls, and vacancy rates are increasing. This is due in large part to stagnant consumer demand, but the major factor is the rise of e-commerce.

“Many traditional brick-and-mortar retailers are being threatened with ‘economic destruction’ by their advantaged online competition,” Jordan writes. This is not a particularly new idea or threat, but after examining the issue, he says, “I believe we’re seeing clear signs that the e-commerce revolution is seriously impacting commercial real estate. Online retailers are relentlessly gaining share in many retail categories, and offline players are fighting for progressively smaller pieces of the retail pie.”

Physical retailers such as Circuit City, Borders, CompUSA, Tower Records and Blockbuster have fallen due to online competition and many others aren’t doing so hot.

Jordan continues: “These mall and shopping center stalwarts are closing stores by the thousands, and there are few large physical chains opening stores to take their place. Yet the quantity of commercial real estate targeting retail continues to grow, albeit slowly. Rapidly declining demand for real estate amid growing supply is a recipe for financial disaster.”

It’s not a pretty picture when one looks at three measures of retailer health in 2012—total sales growth, comparable store sales growth and number of stores.

Total sales growth, according to Jordan, who looked at the National Retail Federation’s list of the Top 100 retailers in 2012, is mixed and is in negative numbers for 20 percent of the sample. “Comp store sales growth—arguably the key measure of retailer health—is also mixed and a quarter of the sample is negative.”

And many of the sales results include retailers’ online segments, so the performance of the physical stores becomes cloudier.

Finally Jordan notes that store counts “are simply stagnant—about as many top retailers shrank their store count as expanded it, and precious few are expanding aggressively. The largest retailers in the U.S. do not look very healthy. And if they’re struggling, it’s likely that their more marginal physical competitors are struggling even more.”

These trends are making it tough for most of the largest owners of retail real estate. The The Wall Street Journal reported that Green Street Advisor, an analysis firm that tracks REITs, has forecast that 10 percent of the roughly 1,000 large malls in the U.S. will fail within the next 10 years and be converted into something with far less retail.

Briefly put, malls are overbuilt and under-nourished. It’s likely that in the near future hundreds of malls will need to be repurposed or demolished. (BTW check out this fascinating site, deadmalls.com, featuring tales of hundreds of already or soon-to-be dead malls.)

It’s also likely that the strong malls in strong (meaning prosperous) areas will stay strong for a while, but check that broadband connection anyway, because the shift of retail spending from offline to online will continue to gain momentum.

Starting a new retail brand? Do it online.

[Image: Mall Daze- #31 by Patrick DB via Flickr cc]

By Neal Gorenflo

Zipcar’s acquisition by car rental giant Avis closes the first chapter of the history of carsharing.  Zipcar’s mixed success raises questions about the future of carsharing and the sharing economy.  What lessons can be gleaned from Zipcar’s record?

The most important lesson is that Zipcar proved there’s demand for car sharing in America, the most car-obsessed culture on the planet. They made it possible for urbanites to act on a growing attitude and impulse around cars and car use – that cars are no longer a meaningful source of identity or freedom as they had been in the 20^th century, and that access to them trumps ownership.

The importance of this shift can’t be overstated.  The car is a linchpin of the consumer economy, at least in the U.S.  It makes the high carbon, high-cost suburban lifestyle possible. When you loosen this linchpin, you begin to shift the entire pattern of consumption for the better.

For instance, carsharing often eliminates the second highest household expense. For each car eliminated, a U.S. household saves $9,900 annually. Much of that additional disposable income may be spent locally boosting local economies.

Then there’s the environmental impact. Carsharing makes urban life more attractive to born-in-the-burbs millenials, who are flocking to cities and the low-carbon lifestyle available there. A conclusive UC Berkeley study showed that one shared car replaces up to 13 owned cars.  And 50 percent of new members join in order to gain access to a car.

There’s no other model of consumption that can reduce resource consumption, increase access to resources, and boost the local economy.  Zipcar showed the world a dramatically better way to consume – and the world ran with it. Entrepreneurs applied the sharing model to innumerable asset categories - from textbooks to tree forts. For individuals, carsharing is a gateway drug to the sharing economy.  A 2010 survey showed that carsharers share across significantly more asset categories than non-carsharers.

Zipcar not only proved there’s demand for carsharing, but also popularized the shared-access model of consumption. They arguably catalyzed the rise of the sharing economy.

So how did Zipcar gain mass appeal? If I had to pick one word, it’d say convenience.  Yes, a great brand, appealing cars, and OK pricing were useful, but Zipcar wouldn’t have gained mass appeal unless it was easy. In their core markets, customers could walk to a car, open it electronically, and drive away.  This was an entirely new experience.

As important as Zipcar has been to carsharing (and the sharing economy), it largely failed as business. While they proved the demand for carsharing, they never became a reliably profitable business. The main culprit was huge fleet costs – cars, maintenance, insurance, and parking.  Acquiring customers profitably was also a challenge.

The lessons of cost control and convenience are not lost on the new wave of carsharing entrants such as Wheelz, RelayRides, and Getaround that represent the future. As peer-to-peer services, their fleets are provided by their customers. The leaders favor electronic access over key exchanges. RelayRides’ partnership with GM’s OnStar service gives them an advantage in acquiring customers. They can potentially onboard millions of OnStar equipped cars through OnStar’s satellite technology.

Still, the cost challenge remains for peer carsharing services. In most case, 60 percent of the rental fee goes to the car owner, the rest to the car sharing company. A 40 percent commission is the highest in the sharing economy by far (Airbnb is 3 percent for hosts, 6-12 percent for guests). The reason is insurance. Up to three quarters of the fee goes to cover insurance.

At the center of this is the issue that cars that are not built for sharing. Few are equipped with access technology at the factory (OnStar cars excepted). Most are over-featured, over-priced, consumer products that appeal to customers' vanity. Repair costs are rising with their increasing complexity. These built in expenses make car sharing expensive. Bottom line - the high rental commissions and cost of cars may make it unattractive for most people to rent out their car.

Peer carsharing companies also face challenges Zipcar didn’t. Renting out your car turns your automobile into a business asset, and commercial use is not covered by most policies in the U.S. This is only a problem if a claim exceeds your peer carsharing company’s coverage. And in most states, insurance companies reserve the right to cancel or non-renew for commercial use, though this is rarely if ever done.

Mass adoption of carsharing requires significant institutional change. Zipcar and the Great Recession broke down cultural barriers to carsharing (and sharing in general), but insurance, regulation, and the product itself need big change for a breakthrough adoption and profitable carsharing businesses. There’s a lesson here for the entire sharing economy.

As a lead-up to Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week, January 13-17, Masdar sponsored a blogging contest called “Engage: The Water-Energy Nexus.”  The following post was among the finalists.

By Evan Scandling

Much of today’s conversation addressing the increasingly important connection between water and energy is focused on solutions applicable to urban centers and developed nations. Yes, smart water grids will be important. Yes, implementing public policies encouraging energy and water conservation can play a key role.

​But what about in the developing world, when the energy-water nexus debate isn’t about reducing demand – but instead about enabling supply?

It is well known that more than 1.2 billion people in today’s world still live without access to electricity. And most people wouldn’t be surprised to hear that nearly 800 million people don’t have access to a clean water source. But how often do we connect these two facts to realize that the vast majority of people living without electricity

Are the same people also struggling to survive without a regular supply of clean water?

Unfortunately a lack of access to electricity and clean water is only a part of the problem. Also absent for these hundreds of millions of people oftentimes is the opportunity for economic improvement. Nearly two-thirds of people who lack safe drinking water live on less than $2 a day. Call it the water-energy-poverty nexus.

Applying holistic solutions to interconnected challenges

When an interconnected problem exists – the combination of energy poverty, water poverty and economic poverty, for example – interconnected, holistic solutions need to be applied. Through our experiences in sustainable rural development in Asia, Africa and India, we’ve seen an approach that works, technically and socially: combining solar-powered water purification systems with village-level micro-entrepreneurship.

From a technical standpoint, the approach  is straightforward: instead of relying on expensive, dirty diesel-powered generators, rural communities can utilize solar-powered water purification systems to pump and purify the local water source to meet World Health Organization standards. Here’s an example of the technology.

With a free, endless source of power from  the sun, money no longer needs to be dedicated to weekly or monthly diesel payments – which is where the opportunities for micro-enterprises comes into play.

Applying self-sustaining, integrated solutions

Most people are familiar with the phrase: “Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, you feed him for a lifetime.” The same self-sustaining approach must be  taken when providing energy and clean water access in developing regions. By training villagers with technical maintenance skills and basic bookkeeping capabilities, village entrepreneurs are created, who are incentivized by monthly wages (from fellow villagers’ energy or water payments) to manage and maintain the solar and water systems.

When renewable energy replaces fossil fuel, a village’s energy source no longer is a financial and health burden. Instead, with the right operational models enabled through targeted donor funding, a village’s energy and water sources can become gateways of long-lasting economic opportunity.

Addressing the water-energy-poverty challenge in a holistic manner that tackles all three problems is not only a good approach to sustainable development in rural regions, it is an approach that can be considered in the developing world as well. Policymakers, business leaders, non-profits, researchers – the array of stakeholders involved in planning our water and energy future – need to ask: how can integrated solutions be applied to integrated challenges?

[Image credit: Oxfam International, Flickr]

Evan Scandling is Head of Communications for Sunlabob Renewable Energy, Ltd. a Laos-based social enterprise specializing in renewable energy and clean water access in developing regions of the world.

If you think about growing up in a house with your family, chances are you experienced some prototypical version of the sharing economy. There was probably only one refrigerator, washing machine, dryer and so on. And if you’re as old as I am, perhaps even only one TV, one car, and one phone. All of these were shared collectively and used as needed, as long as they were available. Of course, conflicts over things like who gets the car or 'what show are we going to watch tonight' eventually led to multiple TVs, cars and phones per household. But, in the vast majority of cases, there was no need for everyone to have their own refrigerator, washing machine and furnace. To own multiples would be incredibly wasteful, since there would be lots of empty space in each refrigerator and the washing machines would sit unused most of the time.

This is exactly the situation that exists between households and, for that matter, between businesses as well. There is literally tons of unused capacity sitting idle, much of the time, standing by for those occasions when they might be needed. Floow2 aims to capture that capacity.

Of course, it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that the internet has the potential to turn the whole world into one big family. And yet, there is a bit of truth in it, at least insofar as it provides the kind of instantaneous connectivity that once only existed between people located in the same physical space.

And so, a new business opportunity emerges, which has been dubbed the sharing economy, not only among individuals, but among businesses as well. Of course, businesses being businesses, sharing means renting, but still, that can translate into considerable savings for large capital equipment items that are only needed occasionally.

There have always been companies that rent out equipment to businesses, which could be anything from copiers to bulldozers. But the new opportunity here is for businesses with spare capacity of their own to get into the rental business in order to more fully utilize their capital equipment. Perhaps in some cases, it might even tip the scales to justify the purchase of a large item, given opportunity for additional revenue generated by renting it out when it is not being used. In the past, the only options to generate additional value from capital equipment would have been to keep it or sell it, usually at a considerable loss.

So this is where a company like Floow2 comes into play

Floow2 describes itself as “an online intermediary service that lowers cost while it increases sustainability.” The service provides improved return on investment to the owners and decreased capital costs to the renters. The company has started out in the area of heavy construction and agricultural equipment with plans to expand into other markets shortly. According to company promotional materials, taking part in the sharing economy will increase “both our pleasure in life, and our opportunities.” The practice is more sustainable because, “we use what we already have. Fewer raw materials will be used and less carbon dioxide emitted.”

How does it work? It’s really quite a straightforward and familiar process. Prospective participants register on the website to create a personal account. Then they input their equipment availability or search for equipment they're looking to rent. When a match is found, an agreement is made. Like other participants in the sharing economy, compliance is largely maintained through feedback and reviews from other site members based on their experiences. Safety certificates are issued. Owners and users review each other’s trustworthiness. It seems like a natural. Their slogan?

“Floow2 connects. Everyone collects.”

 

Image courtesy of Floow2.

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

Follow RP Siegel on Twitter.

Will 2013 see the global sale of more sustainable goods and services reach $2 trillion? 2011 was a milestone year for sustainability with the sales of (more) sustainable goods and services reaching $1 trillion globally. My economic forecast is that in 2013 we have the potential to double that, achieving $2 trillion in global sales of (more) sustainable goods and services. These record sales will be driven by three consumer and business mega-trends:

1.Business Nakedness - You are naked! Get buff!

The C-suite is embracing this reality in today’s digital and connected world.

Nothing a business does goes unnoticed or unreported by consumers, workers or investors. Whether it is a deadly garment factory fire in Bangladesh, pink slime or the BP oil spill, the evidence is overwhelming that corporations are facing unprecedented global public exposure. Getting your business “buff” means re-engineering it to focus on the authenticity and transparency expectations of your customers, investors and workers. This re-focusing is a company’s most prudent and cost-effective course of action. The C-suite understands this imperative. In 2011, 38 percent of businesses surveyed by SCA had a sustainability initiative. Today that number is 64 percent.

This trend will only grow as investors accelerate their assessment of a company's CSR liabilities in their equity analysis. KMPG reports that the world’s largest corporations have a $2 trillion off-balance sheet liability tied to their environmental impacts. This scale of liability is equal to 50 percent of their EBITA profits. An investor lawsuit is in the future for any CEO or CFO that ignores this liability and fails to report it in their 10K and working to mitigate these liabilities. In response, the C-suite is taking actions like the greening of their supply chain and the redesign of their products using sustainable best practices.

2. Sustainability supports everyday low prices

To win price competitive advantage, companies are now using sustainability to drive down business costs. Walmart’s sustainability strategy is based upon the idea that sustainability absolutely supports everyday low prices. Companies from Ford to DuPont are reporting how their sustainability initiatives cut both costs and reduce waste streams - winning them price competitiveness and customers.

A second and even more promising business trend is the use of sustainable best practices to design products that cost less and improve the health of people and the planet. The recent launch of the Starbuck’s $1 recyclable cup is just one of a growing number of examples. Starbucks' cup promotes customer loyalty while also reducing waste streams. The auto industry has embraced this sustainable-product-design strategy offering fun-to-drive cars that use less fuel, emit less greenhouse gases and utilizing recycled and recyclable materials within the car or truck. The result is record auto industry sales fueled by these newly designed vehicles. GM just reported a milestone of selling over 1 million cars with more than 30 MPG fuel economy during 2012.

3. Consumers believe climate change is real and damaging

This is the megatrend of megatrends for the sustainable economy. The Yale Project on Climate Change Communications reports that 74 percent of Americans now believe climate change is real and harmful to them. And consumers are taking action. Here are a few examples:

• The number of Americans who say they “always” or “often” walk or bike instead of driving is at its highest recorded level.


• 57 percent of Americans now report that most or all of the light bulbs in their home are higher efficiency CFLs – up from 40 percent in November 2008

Three Americans in ten say that in the past 12 months they have given business to a company as a reward for their steps to reduce global warming.
This is the megatrend no business or investor can afford to ignore. The revenue success of every company is now being determined by its ability to offer consumers price competitive sustainable products that satisfies the consumer’s search for “in me, on me and around me” solutions.

The $10 trillion global sustainable economy
The sustainable economy is driving toward $10 trillion in annual global revenue as early as 2017 due to two key pricing megatrends. The first pricing megatrend is that the economics of unsustainability continues to rapidly rise. Examples abound from higher corn prices to our pain at the pump. Consumers are also making the connection between cheap products, like the dollar menu item in fast food restaurants, and external costs like increased obesity and diabetes levels among children. A great example of how consumers are reacting to this growing understanding of the true price of unsustainability is the recent report that half of all moms are reducing their purchase of snacks, processed foods and soda.

The second major price megatrend is that the price of sustainability is rapidly falling. Digital has revolutionized the music, movie and paper industries delivering lower prices and waste streams. If oil had experienced the same drop in costs as solar panels it would be selling for $10 per barrel. LED lighting is on the cusp of explosive revenue growth as its manufacturing costs benefit from Moore’s Law. The clear trend-line is that companies and technologies offering "cost less, mean more" solutions will grow market share.

This article is the last of a three part series on the 2013 Sustainable Economy. Please visit 3 Drivers That Will Push Sustainability into an Investment Megatrend in 2013 and 5 Sustainability Trends That Will Shape Stock Valuations in 2013 to see the prior two articles.

Bill Roth is an economist and the Founder of Earth 2017 He coaches business owners and leaders on proven best practices in pricing, marketing and operations that make money and create a positive difference. His book, The Secret Green Sauce, profiles business case studies of pioneering best practices that are proven to win customers and grow product revenues.

Submitted by Guest Contributor

By Jonathan Mayes, SVP of Government Relations, Public Affairs, Philanthropy and CSR

Grocery stores play a major role in consumers’ everyday lives, and touch more people more frequently than most other retailers. That’s a big responsibility, and as one of the largest food and drug retailers in North America, we at Safeway understand our unique position to help create better lives and a healthier planet … with every trip to the store.

We call it the “Heart of Safeway,” and our CSR commitment is based on four platforms: people, products, community, and planet.

Our customers have told us they value the things we do that directly affect them in their homes, neighborhoods and daily lives. That’s why for us, CSR has to resonate on a personal level. After all, it’s the personal experience people have shopping in their neighborhood Safeway, the local farmers whose produce we sell, the community food banks we donate to, and the water we save in the community that have the greatest impact on a daily basis.

Making It Personal: The Heart of Safeway Pledge

To demonstrate how everyday choices by individuals can have far-reaching results, we’re inviting people to take the Heart of Safeway Pledge. Through this program, we’re offering customers and employees the opportunity to commit to an everyday action to live healthier, and to contribute to the health of their communities and our planet.

More than 11,000 people have taken Safeway’s CSR pledge since it launched on October 2, 2012. The Heart of Safety Pledge and our broader CSR initiatives only reinforce that our greatest opportunity to create positive change is by engaging people in a way that has the greatest meaning for them, whether that’s personal health, donating to local causes or doing something positive for the environment.

Those who took the Heart of Safeway Pledge through October 31 also received a coupon for $1 off fresh produce, which was our way of encouraging and rewarding customers for taking action toward health and wellness in their daily lives.  As a result of the great shopper engagement, The Safeway Foundation donated $25,000 to benefit Feeding America in the US and Food Banks Canada.

With more than 1,600 stores across the U.S. and Canada, we also know that the decisions we make as a company can make a real difference in the communities we serve—and beyond. Here are just some of the ways that we’re driving impact across our CSR platforms.

People

At Safeway, we’ve built a culture of wellness for our employees. In 2011, we became the first in the grocery industry to hire a Chief Medical Officer, to lead several employee health and wellness programs. Employees participating in one of our programs collectively lost 18,734 pounds, reducing the overall obesity of our workforce/participants by 4.5 percentage points.

In another program, 63 percent of the participants improved their blood pressure, 47 percent lowered their cholesterol levels and 15 percent improved their Body Mass Index.

Products

To put healthy choices in the hands of our customers as well as our employees, we’re continuing to grow our selection of organic, natural and earth-friendlier products.

This means stocking our shelves with more locally grown produce and sustainable seafood. Our O Organics line, which is exclusive to Safeway, offers USDA-certified organic products throughout the store. Additionally, our Open Nature line – made with 100 percent natural ingredients – includes 130 products ranging from everyday basics to hormone/antibiotic-free, vegetarian-fed, fresh meats.

Earlier this year, we introduced “responsibly caught” Safeway Select skipjack chunk light tuna at an affordable price. It’s part of an effort we’re particularly proud of—and in 2012, Greenpeace USA ranked Safeway No. 1 on its Supermarket Seafood Sustainability list for the second consecutive year.

Community

Our CSR commitment focuses on driving local impact in the neighborhoods we serve, from donating to local schools that our shoppers choose, to recruiting and hiring veterans. We provide customized outreach for our communities through fundraising, donations and volunteer efforts.

In 2011 and 2012, our employees volunteered over one million hours of their time and energy to help create more vibrant communities. We helped make homes and community centers more accessible to people with disabilities, prepared care packages for active duty military personnel overseas, and walked to raise money for organ transplant recipients and for cancer and AIDS research.

With generous support from our customers and employees, Safeway and The Safeway Foundation raised and donated $188.8 million in 2011 to support local health and human services, hunger relief, education programs and assistance for people with disabilities. We recently launched the 2012 Help Us End Hunger Campaign in our stores to help those in need during the holiday season. Since 2001, Safeway and the Safeway Foundation have donated over $1 billion.

Planet

Our Seafood Sustainability initiative is only one example of how we’re constantly evolving to minimize our impact on the planet as a company. We’ve successfully launched a program to convert waste grease from our deli departments into cleaner-burning bio-diesel fuel to power the Vons truck fleet in Southern California.  In 2011 alone, we converted waste grease into 124,524 gallons of bio-diesel.

We reduced electrical usage in U.S. manufacturing plants and distribution centers by six percent by upgrading our equipment and implementing technology to provide up-to-the-minute data on power consumption in refrigeration, lighting and other systems. 

We’ve created and applied sustainability practices that our customers can also be a part of. For example, we just established a goal to reduce the number of plastic and paper bags used by one billion by the end of 2015. One way our shoppers can help us reach this goal is by making the switch to reusable bags. 

An Ongoing Commitment: Focus on Personal, Local

Our commitment doesn’t stop here though. We know real change happens with ongoing effort, and we are constantly exploring how we can make a difference on a personal level. Our focus – not just with our wellness programs and CSR efforts but in all of our operations – is to make an impact that people can see and appreciate in their daily lives, in their neighborhoods, and in our stores.

About the Author: 

Jonathan Mayes is Senior Vice President of Government Relations, Public Affairs, Philanthropy and Sustainability for Safeway Inc., one of America’s largest grocery and pharmacy chain. Safeway operates over 1,660 stores in the Western, Rocky Mountain, Southwestern, Mid-Western and Mid-Atlantic regions of the United States and in western Canada. 

Before joining the Government Relations Department in 1996, Mr. Mayes was a Senior Attorney at Safeway, and focused on employment law, business litigation, and consumer protection matters. Before joining Safeway in 1994, Mr. Mayes was Senior Corporate Counsel for Lucky Stores, and an attorney at Donahue, Gallagher & Woods.

President Barack Obama may consider a summit on climate change during his second term, but that is not fast enough for the editors of the MIT Technology Review. Dismissing the accomplishments and goals the administration touts, the group has urged Obama to confront climate change--or risk having all of his economic, social and political achievements overshadowed.

MIT has joined other organizations, including the World Economic Forum, to tackle global warming seriously. Arguing that any climate change initiatives need to be for the long haul, not part of any economic stimulus package, the letter urges the Obama Administration to do the following:

• Push for new clean energy technologies. Saying that energy sources such as solar are not ready to compete directly with fossil fuels, the MIT editors urge the administration to fund more research and development and establish facilities where companies can share resources and the risks of testing new forms of energy.


• Create market incentives. Since fossil fuels are still the most cost effective forms of energy, the letter insists that the administration consider some kind of market incentive  that would encourage consumers and businesses to adopt renewable energy technologies like a tax or price on carbon.


• Ditch the green jobs argument. Dismissing the green jobs argument as “political cover,” the MIT editors say that the focus should be on reversing the potentially disastrous effects of global warming. While the costs of tackling climate change are steep, the letter makes the point that waiting will only add to the costs.


• Finally, the letter pushes the President to lead:

“The president who takes office that year will thus be facing a far more urgent problem—probably, like you, with no political consensus on how to solve it. But as a president in his final term, you have a chance to take risks. You have the power and the opportunity to lay the groundwork for a new clean-energy policy that will help us avoid the worst consequences of climate change. It is quite possible that if this is not done over the next four years, it will be too late.”

Will POTUS bite? History shows that just because a President was re-elected does not mean he will necessarily go out on a limb and carry out an agenda that ignores politics. Obama will still have to deal with a recalcitrant Congress, and in any event, many presidents run out of political capital quickly: take a look at George W. Bush’s tinkering with Social Security back in 2005. In fact, the usual toxic political climate at home has nudged many Presidents to seek solace in foreign policy. And this is where Obama, if he is really serious about tackling climate change, could advance such an agenda. Since climate change is a global problem, countries both developed and emerging need to work together. Could Obama work with leaders in countries from Canada to the EU to the BRIC nations and agree on some aggressive solutions? As is the case with the more complicated issues that face the U.S., the odds are high that no matter how many public letters like that of MIT, climate will be another can kicked down the road.

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

Image credit of Great Dome at MIT: Wikipedia (John Phelan)

In a recent post on his blog, BusinessGreen, James Murray argues that Google's and Starbucks's use of "complex accounting techniques" to minimize their tax bill undermines their efforts to "position themselves as... environmentally and socially responsible businesses."

Murray claims that despite Google's investments in clean tech R&D and Starbucks's success in sourcing ethically produced coffee, to name just two examples of the companies' responsible activities, these companies "deserve the public condemnation that is coming their way" unless they pay more taxes than required by law.

Murray's indignation notwithstanding, he missteps by assigning blame to actors obeying the rules of the system in which they operate, failing to identify the system itself as the proper target of scorn. Publicly traded companies like Google and Starbucks are fiduciarily beholden to their shareholders to maximize profits and minimize losses. Companies that fail to take advantage of tax loopholes made available by governmental tax codes are remiss in their financial duties and might even be subject to commensurate legal repercussions.

The most compelling corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs are as justifiable in business terms as they are in social and environmental ones. Shareholders and board members should embrace a company's CSR initiatives with an enthusiasm greater than or equal to that of environmentalists and human rights advocates.

Indeed, the examples that Murray identifies -- Google's clean tech investments and Starbucks's ethical sourcing -- have strong business cases to be made for them. A similar business case cannot be made for paying more taxes than legally required.

To Murray's credit, he does note that "it is the successive governments that failed to tackle blatant tax loopholes that must take the bulk of the blame for the current situation," but assigning any blame at all to corporations that marshal their resources to maximize profits only serves to distract from the real issue.

The American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC), along with Business for Shared Prosperity and the Main Street Alliance, recently sent a letter to President Barack Obama and the U.S. Congress that blames federal tax law for the revenues forgone because of corporate tax loopholes. In doing so, the signatories properly identify the culprit of the lamentable corporate tax situation.

“The need for revenue highlights the importance of working toward revenue positive corporate tax reform, including closing the nearly $1 trillion offshore tax haven loophole," said ASBC in a statment. "America's small businesses want large corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. Any corporate tax reform must end the rigged corporate tax system that has corporations paying the lowest share of taxes in half a century at the same time as their profits have risen to 50-year highs."

The letter points out that the corporate tax share of federal government receipts has fallen from 32 percent in 1952 to just 9 percent now. Moreover, the current corporate tax code creates perverse incentives for companies to shift jobs and investment overseas.

Such faulty tax codes operate on the state level as well. As a case in point, Shell recently admitted that its ill-fated attempt to move an offshore oil rig from Alaska to Washington state in the waning days of 2012 was a direct result of Alaskan state taxes that incentivized the moving of the rig. "It’s fair to say that the current tax structure related to vessels of the type influenced the timing of our departure," said a Shell spokesman.

Ultimately, publicly traded companies cannot and should not be expected to change their approach to paying taxes. If governments hope to raise additional revenue from corporations operating within their borders, they will have to alter their tax codes accordingly.

[Image credit: 401(K) 2013, Flickr] [Image credit: kafka4prez, Flickr]

My family will soon be moving to Belfast Cohousing & Ecovillage (BC&E) on the midcoast of Maine and we're excited to live in a community that is part of the sharing economy. Cohousing is collaborative housing where residents actively and intentionally participate in the design and operation of their own neighborhood.

BC&E will be a 36-unit community on 42 acres that will soon break ground on an approximately 4,000 square foot common house with a shared dining room, commercial kitchen, laundry room, guest bedrooms, and playroom.

Construction of the private homes is in progress and a majority have already sold. During sluggish economic times, BC&E priced its units between $167,000 and $342,000, much higher than the $150,000 average home value in Waldo County. Providing a unique offering has positioned the project well in a niche market that values shared space, human interaction, and sustainability.

Study of resales prices over the first two decades of cohousing in California has confirmed that cohousing communities hold their value over time, and in some cases even increase in value from their initial costs-based sales price. A report completed in January 2010 by the appraisal firm of Bartholomew Associates concluded that resales in cohousing communities in Northern California sold at 1.7 to 3.12 times the prices of other townhouses and condominiums in the area. When prices were adjusted for specific differences in age, condition and location, cohousing homes sold at 11 to 63 percent premiums compared to the closest comparables. This data was collected through 2009 and thus includes the years of the great recession."  Creating Cohousing: Building Sustainable Communities (New Society Press, 2011).

The fact that many cohousing communities are partially or largely self-financed and self-developed lowers expenses, but requires far more of members than typical housing developments. BC&E has relied largely on word-of-mouth marketing, but have also utilized social media, fliers, and events. Members have proven themselves to be very resourceful and creative, but some have also experienced burnout.

Cohousing offers some intangible benefits that are appealing to certain homebuyers. The BC&E community layout, including restricted access to automobiles with parking on the periphery, clustered homes, front porches on multi-unit buildings (mostly duplexes), a shared tool shed, community vegetable and flower gardens, and a central mail room encourage spontaneous interactions, sharing, and voluntary simplicity.

This layout contrasts most new neighborhoods in the U.S. that are largely automobile-centered, thus significantly reducing contact with neighbors. "I know a lot of people who live in houses with attached garages and they have never even seen their neighbors," says Dan Capwell, a member of BC&E. "All they see is a car enter the garage in the evening and a car leave in the morning."

Walking trails are planned for BC&E and several acres are designated for community gardens and food production. In many established cohousing communities, the garden space brings people together and encourages the sharing of knowledge and resources.

Community gardens and cohousing in general can also reduce resource consumption. "We are farmers and gardeners," says Nessa Dertnig, a member of BC&E. "We have thought about the fact that not everyone would have to own their own rototiller, hoe, or snow plow. We also have just one car and we've thought of car sharing in the future. If there are a few people interested in sharing a car, there can be fewer cars on site. There are all kinds of ways we can share resources and time and it is all so convenient."

Although sharing space has its benefits, it can also create difficult situations. "I've been thinking about how my children have to share a yard," says Forrest Espinoza, a member of Troy Gardens, an established cohousing community in Madison, Wisconsin. "If you were in a typical community, you would invite other children to come into your yard. If your children weren't getting along, you wouldn't invite those kids to come over and play. In a cohousing community, they have to work things out. It was frustrating in the beginning, but our whole family has experienced incredible growth."

Despite the challenges, more than 120 communities exist across the U.S., with many more in the development phase. "Interest in cohousing has grown and I think it is because of a combination of factors," says Jim Leach, president of Wonderland Hill Development Company. "We have the Baby Boomers seeing it as the ideal way to age in place. The social changes that are happening in the U.S. as we deal with issues around gun control or how we economically survive in a changing world make having community and deeper relationships with the people we live near take on more value and is being well recognized."

[Image credits: Jeffrey Mabee of Belfast Cohousing & Ecovillage]