Search

By Nancy Schurig

Getting from A to B without endlessly choking the planet on a deadly cocktail of toxic pollution is more feasible these days as electric mobility continues to gather pace.

E-mobility, the environmentally friendly method of travel which steers away from existing fossil fuels, uses energy from electrical power sources through charging instead of emitting carbon into the atmosphere.

An abundance of greener options are on offer when looking to make the switch to a more sustainable vehicle choice and advances in alternative fuels – such as hydrogen – have given e-mobility a boost.

But how long will it be before more people choose to step on the (colourless) gas?

The use of hydrogen to power vehicles reduces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions which contributes towards meeting the targets set by the Paris Climate Agreement. Although these vehicles were first introduced in 2014, momentum is building more for them now as car owners become more serious about lowering their carbon footprint in the battle against climate change. It helps that green hydrogen (i.e. hydrogen obtained from renewable energy sources such as solar or wind) is touted as playing a vital role in the decarbonisation of the energy system.

A hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) is powered by pressurised hydrogen from a fuelling station.

Vehicles powered by hydrogen can be filled as quickly as their fossil fuel equivalent, but the benefit outweighs its polluting counterpart in that it produces only water and heat as a by-product. This means there is no tailpipe pollution in transit, resulting in zero carbon emissions.

Hydrogen powers vehicles through a conversion process from chemical energy to mechanical energy. This is achieved when oxygen reacts with hydrogen through a fuel cell, which then runs an electric motor.

Although energy is lost along the way, via the conversion process, hydrogen can decarbonise heavy transport (such as road freight) which would utilise a lot of fossil fuels otherwise, and we are fully aware of the damage caused by dirty fuel. It can also decarbonise the chemical, iron and steel industries as well as improve air quality.

While hydrogen fuel can be produced in a more eco-friendly method through the electrolysis of water, fossil fuels are still currently used in the production chain of hydrogen power. Therefore, the energy used for hydrogen fuel production must be produced using green technologies to ensure the cars are deemed a better option for the environment.

A car that emits no pollution into the atmosphere? It is certainly a conversation starter and sounds far more futuristic than it actually is. But the potential of the element shouldn’t be underestimated – hydrogen is extremely versatile and does more than power a car and reduce noxious emissions from entering the atmosphere.

Not only is hydrogen a success on the ground but in liquid form it is used as rocket fuel to propel a space shuttle’s main engine to heady heights.

NASA has used hydrogen gas to enter space for decades. As much as 500,000 gallons of cold liquid hydrogen is burnt for each shuttle flight in the rocket engines, with an additional 239,000 gallons used up by transfer operations and storage boil off.

Future plans include generating and recycling hydrogen in space (by recombining it with exhaled carbon dioxide for water renewal), which will reduce the requirement for supplies delivered from Earth.

Speaking of which, back down on Earth, hydrogen can be transformed into fuels for planes and ships, (here it can be transported in its liquid form) as well as for cars and trucks. It can be transported as a gas by pipelines and as electricity to power homes.

The opportunity is there for hydrogen-based fuels as shipping and aviation have limited options for low-carbon fuel.

Hydrogen can produce and store energy in a multitude of ways and is one of the prime options for storing energy from renewables, as well as delivering it.

On top of this, further investments in hydrogen will create new skilled jobs in the future and boost global economies.

Dan Lipinski, political scientist and American politician, said: “Hydrogen holds great promise to meet many of our future energy needs and it addresses national security and our environmental concerns.

“Hydrogen is the simplest, most abundant element in the universe.”

What usage of hydrogen has impressed you the most? I would love to hear from you on the subject, especially if you drive a hydrogen-powered vehicle. Please contact me at nancy.schurig@acre.com.

Nancy Schurig is a Senior Consultant within Acre’s Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability team in Europe. She specialises in sales, operations and business development recruitment within the sustainable energy sector, including renewable energy and energy storage systems for the German market.

Previously published on Acre.com and in the 3BL Media newsroom.

Image credit: Ralph Hutter/Unsplash

Now that the Cisco Global Problem Solver Challenge 2021 winners have been officially announced, we are excited for you to learn more about each winning team and the story behind each innovation. The Cisco Global Problem Solver Challenge is an annual competition that awards cash prizes to early-stage tech entrepreneurs solving the world’s toughest problems. Now in its fifth year, the competition awarded its largest prize pool ever, $1 million USD, to 20 winning teams from around the world.

Of the 20 teams, Telecomunicaciones Indígenas Comunitarias, A.C. (TIC) was honored as the regional first runner-up for the Americas with a $75,000 USD prize.  TIC is a civil organization that supports indigenous communities across rural areas of Mexico to build, manage, and operate their own telecommunication networks.  In Mexico, it’s estimated that 12M people lack access to broadband which is a major barrier when it comes to social connection and equality.  Since 2015, TIC has developed an innovative approach that combines open-source technology, community participation and ownership and regulatory advocacy, which has brought thousands of people cellular service in previously uncovered locations.

To learn more about TIC’s mission and the impact and reach it hopes to expand with the monetary prize, I met with Penélope Partida, Operational Coordinator at TIC.

What problem is your technology solution trying to solve?

Penélope: What we’re aiming to do is to diminish the lack of access to communication.  We’re an organization that is comprised of communities and an operational team that decided to take action to address the lack of infrastructure in rural, indigenous communities in Mexico.  We’re based in Oaxaca state, which has the largest indigenous population in Mexico.  Minorities always have less opportunities with most everything.  The reality is that not even commercial operators or the government are able to supply communication rights to the indigenous communities.  So, this is an effort we’re taking on, but we aren’t approaching it alone; we have support from other open-source organizations across the globe.  Together, we developed a 2G mobile communication system, but our next venture is to expand the technology to 4G to not only allow the communities access to communication but also to information through the internet.

Can you explain how the solution works?

Penélope: If you think about the mobile operator that you’re using with your phone, we are essentially serving as a mobile operator, but in a smaller context.  We are replicating the same architecture as 2G technology in smaller networks that are autonomous.  Many of the features for commercial operators run on hardware, but we’re reproducing these features through software so that the system is less expensive and more feasible for the communities to acquire, operate and maintain.

One of the main goals that we’ve achieved so far is the recognition of the Mexican government that the autonomous networks being built by the communities are legally installed and permitted to be used.  While commercial operators must pay for the license, the indigenous communities are free from the use taxes, so it makes it possible for the communities to legally operate and use commercial mobile phones on their own community network.

What inspired you to develop this solution?

Penélope: The first thought from the TIC founders was to enable user feedback where indigenous community radios were operating.  So, the movement started with radio broadcasting and the goal to receive feedback from users who were listening to the stations.  Given not all the communities have a radio station, the opportunity became more about the need to communicate, especially with family.  There’s a lot of migration from Southern Mexico to the United States, so the need to communicate with relatives outside of their communities was increasingly important.

Those is Southern Mexico have a history of being fighters for their rights.  They take pride and care in protecting their territory, and they have a sense of the common good for the community. That means, nobody can own the water, parks or roads.  In that sense, the air is also part of the common good, and they started to think that if their community will not be offered telecommunication services that they can become their own operator of the service.  TIC has partnered to establish networks and train operators across 21 indigenous communities, and there’s a long pipeline of more requests.  Expansion requires 4G technology and that’s what’s currently in development.

How will winning a prize in the Cisco Global Problem Solver Challenge help you advance your business?

Penélope: We’re on a quest to develop 4G technology!  This takes investments in equipment and software feature developer resources.  We’ve purchased used equipment from larger operators who are moving to 5G, but we’re finding that not all the equipment is reusable, so this is protracting our development timeframe.  So, the prize will go a long way to helping us achieve our goal of developing 4G this year and piloting it with a community.

Our intent is to be self-sustainable, and we’ll achieve this when we’re able to expand the user-base, which is currently at 5,000.  Donors are helping to bridge the gap and accelerate our ability to reach well beyond the 70 towns we’re serving.

How has the global pandemic impacted your work?

Penélope: Since last year, our activities have considerably slowed down.  We often travel to the communities to train and support those who administer the network, but most of the communities closed their doors limiting the access.  We’ve only been permitted when a severe network outage occurs.

The pandemic has also caused the slowing of the development of 4G, which has only proven to be more critical given the need for children to connect to the internet to attend school virtually during the pandemic.

Why did you decide to start your own social enterprise versus going to work for a company?

Penélope: I’m aware of the world we live in terms of injustice and inequality, so it made more sense to work in a place where I can do something to fight against the system that’s separating the rich from the poor.  Working for a commercial company doesn’t allow me to make a real difference.  I was personally moved to collaborate with TIC, and this is where I know I can make meaningful impact.
It’s wonderful to see the indigenous communities be proud of themselves for having the network operations in their hands.  They are advancing in their technical learning and seeking solutions for their community.  In the end, they’re able to maintain their autonomy.  It’s their territory, their system, their network to operate, and we are just the support arm for them.  What makes me happiest is seeing the communities be proud of themselves for what they’ve accomplished.

What advice do you have for other social entrepreneurs?

Penélope: Be congruent with what you believe in and what your actions are.  If you see things happening in the world that you don’t agree with, don’t stay still.  Take action.

Stay tuned for more articles in our blog series, featuring interviews with every Cisco Global Problem Solver Challenge 2021 winning team!

Previously published by Cisco and in the 3BL Media newsroom.

Image credit: Cisco and TIC 

Ninety years ago, the murderous gangster Al Capone finally met justice for the mundane crime of failing to file federal tax returns. Now a similar dynamic is at work in the effort to impose common sense restraints on guns in the U.S.

Gun manufacturers are suddenly facing a series of potentially crippling lawsuits that leverage standard consumer protection principles. If the effort succeeds, the courts could finally force gunmakers to account for the lethal consequences of their marketing strategies.

Sandy Hook as the tipping point

Gun safety advocates hoped that the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut would be a political tipping point. It was not, but it could very well be the legal tipping point.

In 2014 a group of Sandy Hook parents filed a lawsuit alleging illegal marketing practices by Remington, which made the shooter’s Bushmaster rifle. Five years later, in 2019 the Connecticut Supreme Court finally ruled that the case could move forward under the provisions of the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).

The PLCAA has long been upheld as a major obstruction to gun safety legislation. It carves out special protections for gunmakers that are not available to other manufacturers. As a result, the makers of some of the most dangerous consumer products in the world have been considered immune from consumer lawsuits.

However, the PLCAA does not offer perfect immunity. Legal experts have noted that the law does provide for gunmakers to be sued for negligence, or for knowingly violating state or federal law. The judge in the 2019 Sandy Hook decision affirmed that analysis.

Calling gunmakers to account for marketing guns

In light of the Sandy Hook decision, the Congressional Research Service undertook its own analysis of the PLCAA in 2019. The office agreed with the view that marketing practices do not come under the law’s blanket protections.

The Research Service did caution that the Connecticut Supreme Court ruling was far from the last word on the topic. Congress could amend the law to strengthen protections for gunmakers, or the U.S. Supreme Court could decide against the Sandy Hook plaintiffs if the case went that far.

In the meantime, though, momentum has gathered for a focus on the marketing practices of gunmakers.

Earlier this summer, for example, a judge ruled that victims of the 2019 synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh can move forward with a lawsuit against both the gunmaker and the gun shop that sold the weapon.

The judge accepted allegations that “Smith & Wesson, the nation's largest gunmaker, knew its AR-15-style rifle could be easily modified into a machine-gun-like or an assault weapon in violation of state law,” and that the company “negligently marketed the rifle to youths on social media and video game-style ads.”

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

A similar argument has come up for a new case brought by Mexico against a group of U.S. gun manufacturers, including Smith & Wesson.

Mexico has strict gun laws that make it virtually impossible for private citizens to purchase guns. Nevertheless, the nation is awash in gun violence, thanks in large part to an estimated 200,000 guns that illegally enter from the U.S. every year.

According to a report on National Public Radio, the Mexican government is suing the group of manufacturers in federal court for $10 billion in damages. They allege that the companies intentionally designed and marketed guns favored by drug cartels.

NPR cites Colt’s gold-plated “Emiliano Zapata 1911” gun as a particularly egregious example, noting that “the gun is coveted by cartel bosses, according to local media reports.”

Other examples of cartel-preferred weapons are Century Arms’ guns styled after the AK-47, and a sniper rifle manufactured by Barrett.

The marketing of guns and risk management

Some legal experts do not expect the Mexican lawsuit to succeed in court. However, the case does provide the Mexican government with an argument to counterbalance accusations that it is not doing enough to stop illegal drugs from entering the U.S.

Other experts anticipate that the case may stand a chance of reaching the discovery stage. That alone would be a significant victory for gun safety advocates, because it could establish a paper trail for marketing practices that target underage youths, at-risk males, criminals, and other persons who should not have unlimited access to firearms.

One interesting development in that regard occurred last month, when Remington offered a $33 million settlement to the Sandy Hook families. The offer occurred after a judge denied Remington’s request to have the Sandy Hook lawsuit dismissed.

The Sandy Hook families are considering the offer as of this writing. Meanwhile their attorney, Josh Koskoff, has emphasized that final amount of the settlement is not as important as landing a financial blow on the gunmaker.

“Since this case was filed in 2014, the families’ focus has been on preventing the next Sandy Hook. An important part of that goal has been showing banks and insurers that companies that sell assault weapons to civilians are fraught with financial risk,” Koskoff has stated.

Regardless of any further action by Congress or the U.S. Supreme Court, the focus on manipulative marketing raises a risk factor that could force the U.S. entertainment industry to reassess its relationships with gun manufacturers.

Another element that could come into play is the failed insurrection of January 6. The violent mob that stormed the Capitol Building on January 6 could have turned the halls of American democracy into a slaughterhouse, were it not for strict local gun control laws that reportedly dissuaded almost all of the participants from bringing firearms to the scene.

The federal investigations and legal consequences of January 6 could reveal connections between the marketing of guns and the role of white supremacist organizations in the political violence that played out in the years and months leading up to the insurrection, even as far back as the armed takeover of the Malheur national wildlife refuge in 2016, and earlier.

Many leading corporations have already cut their exposure to risk by cutting ties with the National Rifle Association (NRA), dropping their membership in the lobbying organization ALEC, or withdrawing political donations to elected officials who supported the January 6 insurrection. Those that remain may also head for the exits as the marketing practices of gunmakers continue to come under the legal magnifying glass.

Image credit: Ben Mater/Unsplash

Sustainability professionals continue to be expected to respond to a growing list of topics, while simultaneously recognizing the intersectionality among them. As leaders who are helping our organizations navigate the complex ESG landscape, we can’t afford to ignore or minimize pressing issues. Racial equity and justice is one such area that demands our attention, yet it comes with some underlying barriers that we need to address.

Our teams can better reflect our global society

First and foremost, we should make it a priority to diversify our own sustainability organizations. While some of our work consists of implementing diversity initiatives across entire organizations, it’s essential that the work starts with us, and our own teams reflect the outcomes we would like to see at scale. Bringing a larger number of people with different backgrounds and experiences to help shape our sustainability strategy and stakeholder engagement is critical to the work we do now more than ever. Let’s look beyond the typical sustainability and CSR applicants to those in other sectors and industries (e.g nonprofits, including community organizing, and government).

Our new virtual work environment offers us the ability to attract talent from areas we perhaps previously hadn’t been able to consider -both across the U.S. and internationally. And, the diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) field is representative of many diverse BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and people of color) backgrounds. Talent in this space could be easily plugged in to participate on teams as well as lead sustainability and CSR organizations, as many of the same skillsets such as change management, communication, strategy and coalition building are transferable.

Racial equity can be integrated into sustainability education

We also need to introduce more education on racial equity into our business schools, continuing education workshops and seminars, and conferences. Racial equity and broader DEI should be a cornerstone of our sustainability education and an integral pillar of our ongoing work. The need for this racial equity educational focus is not so much around why racial equity is important. We must educate our future leaders to have a clear understanding of what it is we are really talking about, and how we as sustainability leaders can build this into our work and implement efforts that advance a more racially equitable organization and society.

One such example of racial equity education is happening at Presido Graduate School (PGS), a graduate school dedicated to educating individuals who are working for a more just and sustainable world, where I serve as adjunct faculty. Over the past year, we reached out to our community to engage in dialogue on racial equity, including holding monthly student meetings. We hosted events on how philanthropy and ESG are being used to dismantle systemic/structural and institutional racism, and launched a Racial Equity in Action blog series.

PGS has now introduced an online course called “Integrating Racial Equity into Our Sustainability Work,” which is meant to provide a foundation for sustainability and social impact leaders. All incoming MBA and MPA students will be required to take this course and it will be made available to the broader faculty, staff and larger student body as well. The elements of the course include an overview of familiar sustainability frameworks that are already integrating responsibilities on diversity and racial equity such as the SDG’s, the UN Declaration on Human Rights, SASB and the UN Global Compact to name a few. It explores the rising investor focus on ESG and its corresponding implications for diversity and racial equity. The course also provides a brief overview of the history and current state of racial equity in the U.S. as well as considers the business case for diversity, its societal value, and how we can move beyond performance measures to insist on lasting systems-level change. Finally, and perhaps of most importance, the course introduces students to existing frameworks for integrating racial equity in the workplace, which can be leveraged by sustainability leaders to build and advance racial equity programs inside of organizations.

The value that sustainability leaders can bring to advancing racial equity and dismantling racial injustice could prove transformative. Racial equity, and more broadly DEI, are not stand-alone issues. Rather, they are intertwined with all of the work we do in creating value for our organizations, society and the world.

Image credit: Unsplash

After the murder of George Floyd last summer, U.S. companies promised solidarity with Black Americans and pledged billions of dollars in funds to tackle the inequities rampant across society and the economy.

But a year later, many of those commitments, which Fortune has described as “hazily promised as investments in communities of color,” have not gone anywhere.

It’s a missed opportunity for companies and communities of color, wrote Greg Johnson for Fortune earlier this summer: “Corporate America is missing out on the opportunity to drive innovation and growth by creating business value and greater reach into international markets, which advancing racial equity would do.”

Assessing what has occurred in Minneapolis, itself a corporate headquarters hub and where Floyd died, the Brookings Institution assessed that the past year has been more about platitudes than progress, concluding, “Unfortunately, in the past year, corporations have prioritized highly visible national equity campaigns and philanthropic commitments over the harder, needed work to dismantle systemic racism inside their businesses and in the communities in which they operate.”

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

Despite all the hard data out there verifying that diverse companies are successful companies, many Black leaders still see a lack of urgency in the business community – and there’s an impatience with press releases and public statements. “Business leaders who do not believe that social justice and racial issues are their problem probably should just retire before they embarrass themselves in public,” John Hope Bryant, the chairman and CEO of Operation HOPE, said in an interview with CNBC this June.

Meanwhile, Black business owners, many of whom have been hit hard by the pandemic over the past 18 months, aren’t waiting for corporate America to decide whether it will make good on its pledges or not.

According to a recent Bank of America survey, 94 percent of Black business owners said they are supportive of enacting social change through their business. Further, 85 percent of them revealed that the calls for social justice have affected how they approach conducting their businesses. About the same percentage also confirmed they have changed, or will change, how they look at employees’ benefits and wellness.

While about half of Black business owners in the same survey they would apply for a loan, only about a third said it would be done to expand their business; more replied they needed such funds to meet payroll or to deploy new safety measures.

In many communities, that need will have to be met by Black-owned banks. One example will be in Maryland, one U.S. state that has one of the more supportive environments for Black-owned businesses. Yet Maryland itself has only one Black-owned bank – one that became a vital resource for many local business owners at the onset of the pandemic as many banks we’re either unable or unwilling to process the federal government’s emergency loan programs.

The sentiment of Black business owners reflected in this BofA survey shows a sobering reality many local leaders face – go on one’s own if any difference is going to be made. But considering the effects of systemic racism and the role the financial sector has had in preventing many Black Americans from reaping the rewards of intergenerational wealth, that sentiment doesn’t leave corporate America off the hook.

Image credit: My Networking Apparel/Unsplash

The fast food sector has taken its share of lumps for cultivating a wasteful, throwaway culture. Still, chains like McDonald’s and Starbucks have enough purchasing power to help steer the global economy on a more sustainable course. That could even extend to the sustainable building market, with social as well as environmental benefits.

Sustainable building pays off in more ways than one

The sustainable building trend is most often associated with saving energy, but there are other benefits as well.

In commercial markets, prestige and work-life quality can easily tip the scales in favor of a sustainable building.

Back in 2016, the firm Bentall Kennedy ran the numbers on the performance of office buildings according to rent, occupancy, and tenant satisfaction scores. Those with a third-party green certification scored measurably better than those without.

With enough momentum, a focus on sustainable building can also contribute to an entire city’s sustainability profile, helping to attract new business while contributing to an overall improvement in urban carbon emissions.

The sustainable building of the future: more, faster, better

It’s easy to associate the sustainable building trend with premium materials and artisanal accents, leading to higher up-front costs and longer construction times. However, that is not necessarily true in all cases.

The up-and-coming sustainable building firm Nexii, for example, has developed a business model that addresses the need for a rapid transition into more sustainable buildings.

Nexii is becoming best known for its proprietary alternative building material, called Nexiite. The company claims that Nexiite production involves less embodied carbon than concrete, partly because it contains no lime or Portland cement.

That is only part of company’s sustainability plan. Nexii has developed a modular, factory-built, flat-pack delivery system that it claims can reduce construction time by up to 75 percent.

In addition to easing the disruption to neighbors during construction, the sharply reduced time frame can also help reduce carbon emissions related to construction worker travel to and from the site.

The modular system also enables Nexii to trim on-site construction waste down to the bone, with a further improvement in emissions related to transporting and disposing construction debris.

The Nexii system also addresses other issues that can drive up costs for conventional buildings, including weather-related construction delays, commodity price spikes, and shortages of manual and professional labor.

Rapid growth for a sustainable building company

Nexii has already caught the eye of investors, partly thanks to construction projects in the fast food area.

Last year, Nexii raised a new Starbucks drive-through store in British Columbia (shown above) in only six days. The company anticipates a 30 percent energy savings over conventional buildings, based on the thermal qualities of Nexiite and what the company describes as a tightly sealed building envelope.

Nexii also built a new Popeyes restaurant in Canada earlier this year, and in less than two weeks. It also lists the company A&W among its clients.

The company has also linked up with two leading engineering firms that indicate plans to embrace the market for new fast-food facilities and other smaller commercial buildings.

Honeywell is one of the firms. Last month, Nexii tapped Honeywell as its exclusive building technologies supplier, with a focus on energy savings and operational efficiencies.

"The companies will integrate Nexii expertise in high-performance and efficient building systems with the Honeywell Small and Medium Building Administrator powered by Honeywell Forge, an affordable and scalable building portfolio management system designed specifically for small- to medium-sized buildings,” Honeywell explained.

“More than 90 percent of the U.S. commercial building stock consists of properties under 50,000 square feet, and most of these buildings lack a proper building management system to manage energy usage,” Honeywell added. “The Honeywell Small and Medium Building Administrator enables multi-site businesses to drive smarter building operations and meet compliance requirements.”

How the fast food sector can push market for affordable green homes

The other new partner also indicates a focus on the fast food area. Last week, Nexii announced that it is bringing on Trane to be the “exclusive North America heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) supplier for new, sustainable buildings constructed by Nexii including retail stores and restaurants.”

Gregor Robertson, Nexii’s executive vice president, strategy and partnerships, explained that “bringing together our breakthrough, airtight building solutions with Trane’s highly-efficient HVAC systems means our clients can commit to even greater energy savings and more significant sustainability commitments.”

Although Nexii appears to be focused on the commercial buildings market at present, the partnerships with Honeywell and Trane could hint at broader plans that eventually include the residential market.

That could make all the difference as the U.S. housing market faces a crisis of historic proportions, as the need for affordable housing collides with the need for the more sustainable building of the future.

Fast food establishments have provided Nexii with a foot in the rapid-construction sustainable building door. The next moves are up to Nexii, but it looks the stock of green homes in the U.S. could grow more quickly in the future.

As for McDonald’s, the company is not listed among Nexii’s clients yet. However, at the beginning of this year McDonald’s announced plans to build 500 new stores in the U.S., towards a total of 1,300 globally. Considering the company’s growing interest in LEED construction, it wouldn’t be surprising if McDonald’s takes a dip into the Nexiite pool.

Image credit: Nexii

Norway has long been a global leader in the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs), but even this summer, the country made a breathtaking leap. Almost two-thirds of newly bought and registered automobiles that Norwegians purchased in July were zero-emission cars, according to the country's Road Traffic Information Council.

Leading the pack in raw numbers was the Ford Mustang Mach-E (shown below), followed by the Skoda Enyaq, Toyota’s RAV4 (which sells a plug-in hybrid model in Norway) and the Volkswagen ID.4. Tesla’s Model 3 has been the best-selling car in Norway in 2021, to the point that it sold out in June, during which it boasted a 15 percent market share. And all this has been underway despite disruptions in global supply chains and the shortage of microchips.

All told, about three in four Norwegians are going all-electric when choosing their next vehicle.

July numbers bode well for the country’s goal to sell only EVs by 2025.

How is Norway shifting further away from gasoline- and diesel-fueled cars? The short answer is that the country’s policies are driving much of this change: Taxes are far higher on cars powered by fossil fuels. The system is not perfect, as critics point out that cars bought for corporate fleets benefit from a loophole that allows for lower taxes on corporate buyers of automobiles than for consumers.

Nevertheless, the fact that 64 percent of new car buyers in Norway chose EVs last month is still impressive. Some may dismiss the statistics, pointing out that the country is home to only 5.3 million people and therefore cannot serve as a harbinger of what’s to come in other nations. But writing for Electrek, Fred Lambert disagrees. “Norway made a needed market correction by taxing gas-powered cars to truly represent their costs,” Lambert wrote this week. “With this market correction, electric vehicles are prevailing as the best solution as more EV options are hitting the market.”

In any event, what was once a trend has become reality. All-electric vehicle sales in Norway surpassed those of fossil fuel-powered cars last year, with 54 percent of all new cars in 2020 being battery-powered. Even the country’s tourism sector is touting Norway’s success on this front, reminding visitors that it’s relatively easy to rent EVs, and that charging is easy thanks to 16,000 charging stations installed across the country, including 3,300 fast chargers.

Image credit: Hendrik Morkel/Unsplash

Plant-based and lab-grown meat, as well as alternatives to dairy-based cheese and milk, have scored the attention of entrepreneurs and investors in recent years as the “real thing” turns out to often have a huge impact on (of course) animals, the climate and humans. But another sector, the global chocolate industry, has amassed its own share of critics for many years.

First, there are the effects chocolate has on both land and climate change. Global makers of this popular confection have also long been the in the crosshairs of human rights activists, who say the industry is a huge driver of human rights violations, including child slavery and forced labor.

Some players within the sector are responding in kind. Companies and NGOs have partnered on projects in attempts to minimize any environmental impact. Smaller firms have also promised tactics such as using fair trade cacao and cocoa beans, sourcing only organic beans or buying only single-origin ingredients to reduce any impacts on people and the planet. One such company has even said that it strives to be “regenerative” instead of extractive. Meanwhile, other companies are seeking piecemeal approaches to making chocolate that is more sustainable, as in rolling out vegan options.

Nevertheless, there still lies the specter of a shrinking chocolate supply worldwide, with deforestation and climate change the primary reasons.

To that end, one German startup says it’s working on a solution: lab-grown chocolate.

Qoa, based in Munich, says it’s on a mission to reinvent mass-produced chocolate, without using any cacao. The company for the most part is mum on how exactly it is making this happen: One scientist working for Qoa mentioned the use of yeast. In any event, with its “precision fermentation” process, the company says it can churn out a chocolate product that is 10 times more sustainable and 20 percent cheaper than conventional chocolate. “We do for chocolate what Oatly did for milk,” says the company.

For now, Qoa has a handful of employees, but is hiring. Leading the company is the sister-brother duo of Sara Marquart, who previously worked as a scientist at Atomo Coffee (the coffee-less coffee company) and Maximilian Marquart, who reveals a solid track record working with startups.

In explaining the company’s mission and process, Sara Marquart said to Fast Company, “Pretty much every food has a fingerprint, like a human has a fingerprint, right?” Describing Qoa’s process, she added, “It’s very unique - We analyze the fingerprint of raw cocoa, fermented cocoa, roasted cocoa, to understand what is making cocoa this unique little bean that has so much flavor?” Currently, the steps taken are similar to the brewing of beer; the concoction is they roasted and allowed to dry, resulting in a proxy for cacao-based chocolate.

As for future plans, Qoa is looking at the big picture, as in becoming the mass-market standard for chocolate by 2035. For those interested in eventually testing the product, the company makes no promises, but there is an email sign-up list for those interested in applying to test Qoa’s chocolate.

Image credit: Alexander Stein/Pixabay

With evermore dire reports from climate scientists on the relentless pace of climate change, the race to scale electric vehicles (EVs) is gaining speed. Utilities and start-ups are working feverishly to build fast-charging networks as automakers make major investments in EVs. That level of innovation is critical if the world is to finally shift gears to more sustainable transport systems.

Early entrants like Tesla and newer players across the transport system are all revving up their investments in weaning the world from its dependence on the fossil fuel-powered vehicles that are a major contributor to climate change. Transportation is responsible for 24 percent of direct CO2 emissions from fuel combustion, and road vehicles account for nearly three-quarters of those emissions.

According to the International Energy Agency, the global electric-vehicle fleet could reach 230 million if governments accelerate efforts to reach international climate and energy goals.

Charging infrastructure is the missing link

In the transition to EVs, the U.S. lags behind much of the world. In 2021, just over 1.13 million vehicles on American roads are EVs, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). That leaves the country  with nearly 6 million electric vehicles in operation at the end of 2020; and the rate of EV adoption in the U.S. is far lower than other industrialized nations.

As automakers like Ford, General Motors, Volkswagen and others make major investments in EVs, both the slow speed of charging EVs and the charging infrastructure is woefully inadequate to meet the demands of a scaled-up U.S. EV fleet.

Tesla’s Supercharger network is the most extensive electric vehicle fast-charging network on the planet, with over 25,000 Superchargers at over 2,700 stations around the world. However, its proprietary network is only available to Tesla owners, although Electrek recently reported Tesla has confirmed plans to open its network to other automakers next year. Still, even a more widely available Supercharger network won’t be enough to meet the need of millions of more EVs on the road.

And then there’s the sometimes snail pace of charging. Depending on the type of charging point and size of a battery, electric cars can take anywhere from 30 minutes to 12 hours to charge; a typical EV takes about eight hours to charge from empty to full on a 7kW charging point, according to Pod Point, a manufacturer of EV chargers.

New charging technology for EVs promises breakthrough

Enter a new player on the scene, ADS-TEC Energy GmbH, a German company offering a battery buffered technology which it says can power an EV for a distance of 62 miles (100 kilometers) in 10 minutes.

What makes the technology stand out, according to the company, is that the ultrafast charging (up to 320kW) can use existing power-limited grids without additional infrastructure power upgrades. In other words, with the battery buffered technology, power for the ultrafast charging can be stored rather than drawn directly. This could help to avoid brownouts and blackouts that could occur if millions of vehicles were to take advantage of the ultrafast charging. And because it uses the existing electricity grid, the company says its technology can reach previously just about any areas including more remote and rural areas, helping to ensure more inclusive access to EV charging.  

While ADS-TEC Energy has been honing its technology for the past decade, it got a lift this past week when it announced a business combination agreement to merge with European Sustainable Growth Acquisition Corp, a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, formed earlier this year to fast-track sustainable solutions to global challenges likes climate change.

With the merger, ADS-TEC Energy has a market value of some $580 million, according to Bloomberg, giving it a leg up in making its technology more widely available to utility companies, auto-equipment manufacturers, and charge-point operators.

It will be competing against a range of firms entering the space, from U.S. startup FreeWire Technologies to U.K.-based Gridserve, according to Greentech Media. 

The EV market is heating up

That the race to scale EVs is heating up is no surprise to Lars Thunell, chairman of the European Sustainable Growth Acquisition Corp. That’s why they made a substantial bet on ADS-TEC Energy, he told TriplePundit.

“With the number of EV cars coming to the market, this is just going to explode. If we thought the EV market was hot when we began our search for a company to acquire, now it’s so hot you can hardly touch it,” Thunell said.

The charging technology has been one of the biggest bottlenecks to scaling EVs, he added, and avoiding the need to invest in specially dedicated power lines for ultrafast charging offers a particularly potent breakthrough.

“We’ve all seen the recently released IPCC report, and there is really no time to waste,” Thunell said, “which is why we have moved quickly on getting this merger together. More than ever, we need tangible solutions that can deliver net zero emissions.”

Image credit: Michael Fousert/Unsplash

Imagine being able to open your smartphone yourself, replace the battery with a third-party part and maintain the phone’s warranty. Does that sound like having your cake and eating it too? Perhaps it shouldn’t. According to current United States law — the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, to be precise — consumers already have that right to repair. That hasn’t stopped electronics companies from putting “warranty void if removed” stickers on top of screws, though. When it comes to limitations placed on a consumer’s “right to repair,” warranties are only the tip of the iceberg.

Phones, cars, hospital equipment and even tractors are being designed so that authorized specialists are exclusively given the ability to fix common issues. Hospitals have struggled to repair ventilators, a primary tool in supporting COVID-19 patients; farmers have had to forego crops because of broken-down tractors; and, of course, consumers throw away year-old phones in exchange for upgrades. The Associated Press reports such issues as withholding repair tools and creating software-based locks. Electronics companies claim they create these barriers to avoid security issues — some security specialists disagree, and the Biden Administration’s recent stand for a competitive economy includes a clear directive in favor of the consumer’s right to repair.

Biden, Wozniak: A right to repair supports healthy competition

Last month, President Joe Biden signed an executive order aimed at increasing competition in the U.S. economy. This included a directive for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to issue rules that prevent manufacturers from inhibiting repairs conducted by independent shops and device owners, restrictions which can violate antitrust laws. Already, the FTC has unanimously voted to adopt a policy statement that enhances its enforcement of such laws.

“The heart of American capitalism is a simple idea: open and fair competition — that means that if your companies want to win your business, they have to go out and they have to up their game; better prices and services; new ideas and products,” the president recently said at the White House. “….Now, look, I’m a proud capitalist. I spent most of my career representing the corporate state of Delaware. I know America can’t succeed unless American business succeeds. But let me be very clear: Capitalism without competition isn’t capitalism; it’s exploitation.”

Not only does the right to repair increase economic competition and benefit hospitals, farms and car owners, but it also increases technological innovation. Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak made a public statement last month in support of the right to repair on Cameo, a platform where people pay celebrities for a personal message. Wozniak claimed Apple wouldn’t have existed if he couldn’t take machines apart, learn about them and appropriate them for his own use. The right to repair, according to Wozniak, supports innovation.

“We wouldn't have had an Apple had I not grown up in a very open technology world,” he said. Wozniak left Apple in the mid-1980s.

Security professionals dispute the claim that right to repair compromises security

And what of messaging currently touted by companies like Apple, claiming that opening repairs to all creates security threats? The nonprofit advocacy group securepairs.org — composed of respected information technology and information security professionals — pushes back on that suggestion.

In its mission statement, the organization states: “As security and information technology professionals, we recognize that the freedom to repair, fix and tinker is core to the advancement of the technology industry. We also recognize that it is indispensable if we are to not only realize new products and services, but also keep them secure from hackers, cyber criminals and other sophisticated adversaries.

“As citizens across the country seek to enshrine the right to repair their personal, home and workplace electronics in law, securepairs.org is about giving the information technology and information security communities voices and seats at the table. As others look to cast repair and tinkering in a negative light, we seek to inform the public that repair is critical to good and lasting security,” the nonprofit writes.

No matter which side of the security issue you fall on, you can’t deny that the right to repair movement is gaining momentum. This summer, New York became the first state to adopt legislation that increases access to electronics and farm equipment repair. The same month, Representative Joe Morelle of New York introduced the Fair Repair Act to Congress. If nothing else, these are wins for the U.S. economy.

Image credit: Pixabay