Search

Sports were an underlying theme at the 2019 3BL Forum just outside Washington, D.C., this fall. As hundreds of business leaders convened to discuss what’s next in the brands taking stands movement, the hometown Washington Nationals battled it out against the Houston Astros in the 2019 World Series. 

Speakers donned caps and led the crowd in cheers for the home team—and, as it turned out, it paid off. The Nats defeated the Astros on the first night of the Forum, tying the series 3-3 and forcing a Game 7 faceoff—where they came away with a decisive 6-2 win, claiming the first World Series title in franchise history. 

But the Nationals’ upset victory wasn’t the only reason we heard so much about sports while discussing the rise of corporate, employee and consumer activism. Sports teams, leagues and franchises are, of course, businesses—and in many ways, they have everything any business could want: unbridled fan engagement and fierce loyalty that lasts a lifetime. 

“Sports, culture and the arts are true common denominators in our society and throughout the world,” Kevin Martinez, vice president of corporate citizenship for ESPN, said at the Forum. 

As de-facto cultural leaders of their hometowns, often with pockets of fans that stretch across the country and around the world, sports franchises are in a unique position to leverage their clout to influence public discourse long after the final whistle. Increasingly, sports stakeholders are taking up this mantle with pride, moving beyond the game to engage fans, players and communities in making the world a better place—including support for social and environmental change. 

At the Forum, Alicia Chin, senior manager of social impact and growth initiatives for the National Hockey League, shared just one of these case studies—which can serve as an example not only for the sports sector, but for any business looking to take a stand for a brighter future. 

The NHL: An untold story of sustainability 

It has been 10 years since the NHL began its sustainability journey in earnest, but its work remains largely under the radar. Still, taking a stand for positive environmental impact makes sense for an organization like the NHL—which depends on cold weather at a time when global temperature rise is altering when, where and how games can be played. 

“People always ask us, ‘Why does NHL care about the environment?’” Chin said at the Forum. “But if you think about it, our sport was born on frozen ponds, and as the climate continues to change, access to those ponds decreases. Similarly, we play in a giant refrigerator: A lot of energy is required for us to play on ice, as well as water, so we have a responsibility to reduce our impact and continue to make sure that our sport can be played for future generations.” 

The NHL was the first North American professional sports league to issue sustainability reports including a carbon footprint, and it has offset that carbon footprint for three consecutive seasons. 

Moving forward, the league is going beyond engagement with its professional franchises to help community ice rinks across the U.S. decrease their environmental impact and costs, ensuring longevity for the long term. 

“Many of these community rinks are 20 to 30 years old. Their infrastructure is really outdated,” Chin explained. “To help community rinks continue to stay open, we are taking those best practices that our arenas have adopted and translating them to the community rink space.”

“Particularly with the Montreal Protocol Kigali amendment kicking in, where HFCs are being phased out, refrigerants are becoming a massive issue for our industry,” she continued. “So, we are investing in helping rink operators and owners understand how they can invest in new environmental sustainability technology.” 

Through its Greener Rinks Initiative, the NHL launched a multiyear partnership with the chemical company Chemours to provide sustainable refrigerants to community rinks—and the program has already evaluated the impact of more than 4,800 rinks across North America.  “Again, this is all about helping these rinks stay open, because our goal is to continue to increase access to our sport,” Chin said. 

Can sustainability boost inclusion? 

(Image: Alicia Chin of the NHL (center) speaks at the 2019 3BL Forum alongside Kevin Martinez of ESPN (right) and Roger McClendon of the Green Sports Alliance.) 

The fact that hockey is a sport historically dominated by white people is well known—and the butt of plenty of bad jokes. But Chin and her team hope that the NHL’s drive toward environmental and social sustainability can help to get new fans, players and communities interested. 

“We also think about how sustainability can help hockey become a more inclusive sport,” Chin said at the Forum. As part of several initiatives aimed at increasing inclusion within hockey, the NHL’s Learn to Play program disburses used equipment and grants free ice time to families who otherwise couldn’t afford to get their kids involved in sport. 

“Obviously diversity and inclusion is an important issue—particularly, I would say, for hockey. We want to reduce those barriers to our game: Do people feel welcome in the sport? Do they have access to places to play? And can they afford it?” 

(Image: Roger McClendon, executive director of the Green Sports Alliance, on stage at the 2019 3BL Forum.) 

What’s next for sports and sustainability? 

It’s not hard to find examples of sports industry stakeholders that engage consistently with their communities around the environment and social change. But the sports sector is still only scratching the surface of the impact they can have, says Roger McClendon, executive director of the Green Sports Alliance (GSA), a convening organization for sports and sustainability. 

“The power of sport, in my mind, is really under leveraged,” McClendon said at the Forum. Given the increasing social and environmental challenges we face—from the climate crisis to increasing social division that’s driving racial and socioeconomic tensions worldwide—it’s time for sports to tap into its true potential, McClendon said. 

The GSA’s Playing for the Next Generation campaign focuses on fighting climate change, improving communities, and engaging youth in both sports and driving positive impact. Its 10th annual Green Sports Summit, to be held at U.S. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis in June 2020, focuses on the future of the campaign—and sports and sustainability more broadly. 

“There's a lifetime loyalty with teams, but fans increasingly want their teams to do more to engage with the community and to leave a better footprint than where they started,” he told business leaders at the Forum. “We can't be satisfied based on where we stand today. Given the crises we're in, we have to do more.” 

Image credits: Unsplash/Jimmy Conover, Flickr/pmonaghan and 3BL Media 

Can murals help spread the message about how climate change risks, including sea level rise, can impose on the planet – notably coastal communities?

Why not? Murals can help sooth the soul, teach a lesson or two and offer a boost to local businesses, too – from fabulous Miami Beach to Honolulu and countless towns in between, like adorable Morro Bay, California.

This month, the nonprofit PangeaSeed Foundation, working with Clean Sweep Frederiksted, will launch a public art program in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. For this ten-day public art program, PangeaSeed says it has agreed to partner with The Ocean Agency’s Glowing Glowing Gone campaign in order to raise public awareness of the urgent crisis facing coral reefs in the Caribbean and around the world.

Above: mural by Charlie Johnston, Churchill, Manitoba, Canada.

This campaign is important as coral reefs provide citizens worldwide with food and income, while supporting approximately a quarter of all oceanic life. The Glowing Glowing Gone campaign, which has been working with UN Environment, aims, in its words, to “inspire the policy and funding necessary to save coral reefs through a global show of popular support.” As seen through the rapid-fire growth in public awareness of the dangers of ocean plastics, this organization seeks to utilize creativity to spark more action within coastal communities worldwide.

PangeaSeed’s program, “Sea Walls: Artists for Oceans” has already made its mark in many communities worldwide. Some of the artists whose work is shown here - both on coasts and inland - on 3p today are currently at work in St. Croix . . . so consider these beauties a hint of what’s to come in the Caribbean.

Above: mural by Aaron Glasson, San Diego, CA

There are several reasons why murals and other public art installations can be a boost for local businesses as well as promote the messages we hear if we’re going to truly band together and save the planet. Murals impart that a particular building or city block is being cared for; they can inspire action without being preachy; and because they discourage tagging or other forms of vandalism, they actually can be relatively easy to maintain and care for.

Image credit, including the lead photo,“Slow Surrender” by Carly Ealey in Napier, New Zealand: PangeaSeed Foundation

We weren’t planning for this year to fly by as quickly as it has, but now that it’s time to take a look at 2019 in review, we ran the numbers to present you with the most popular TriplePundit articles for this year.

In looking at trends for what resonated with our readers during 2019, a few things come to mind: Readers are responding to legacy companies determined to change how they conduct business; the concepts defining diversity and inclusion are changing; renewables will take root in the U.S. despite a hostile White House; and we have a long road ahead to ensure we have the best possibly prepared and trained workforce for the future. 

This all makes sense, because if we expect companies to become more responsible and sustainable, we need to ensure that they remain viable, too.

The following list was a great walk down memory lane. Enjoy! 

CEO Shares How Transparency Helps SC Johnson Address Global 'Crisis of Trust': 3p spoke with SC Johnson’s CEO to learn more about its industry-leading transparency program and how it helps the cleaning products giant maintain trust at a time when it's in increasingly short supply. Corporate sustainability professionals must have bookmarked this article like mad; this was our most read article during 2019, month after month. (Mary Mazzoni)

Offshore Wind Power Is Crushing Carbon Capture Dreams: Once Denmark’s fossil fuels titan, Ørsted rebranded and is now going all-in on renewables — and as it finds more opportunities to invest here in the U.S., proponents of carbon capture are finding less interest in what was at one time a much-ballyhooed clean technology. (Tina Casey) 

Tupperware: A Legacy Brand Embracing a Sustainable Future: To paraphrase those 1970s television commercials, the Tupperware lady has the freshest ideas for locking in . . . corporate sustainability. Read how a decades-old company that makes plastic products is planning for the circular economy. (Mary Mazzoni)

12 Plant-Based Foods Coming to Market in 2019: Like many publications, we write listicles and predictions in January — and quite often, come December, we hope no one reads or remembers them. But remember when the conversation about plant-based foods was all about Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods, only to see that months later, more companies now have (plant-based) skin in the game? Many of these predictions and trends have come to fruition. (Mary Mazzoni)

CVS Quit Cigarettes So Americans Would Too—And It Worked: Stop yourself if you clench your jaw at the local CVS while the register prints a receipt a mile long for the three items you purchased. Five years ago, this company stuck its neck out and stopped selling profitable tobacco products. Considering all the controversy over vaping the past few months, that 2014 decision was one of the smartest, and most forward-thinking decisions, a retailer ever made — and years later, everyone else in the industry looked like meek followers. (Patrick Grubbs)

New Plastic Pollution Solution May Produce Sustainable Fuel: We’ve yet to see whether those discarded PET bottles can be churned into transport fuel or electricity seamlessly, but we think this article by our clean tech guru resonated due to this simple fact: We’re trashing the planet with single-use plastic, and we’re realizing we need solutions to stall this crisis. (Tina Casey) 

Old Navy Makes Purple Patriotic for a Good Cause: Why would a story about a purple T-shirt resonate with readers? Well for one thing, there is far worse news marring the global fashion industry, and with the cesspit called political polarization in which we find ourselves, a message of inclusion struck a chord with our readers. (Megan Amrich)

Why Your Company Needs a Neurodiverse Workforce: The definition of diversity and inclusion is widening, as it should — and this article, part of a series underwritten by DXC Technology, was one of several stories that made the compelling case for hiring citizens on the autism spectrum. For our writers, the opportunity to work on this project was an emotional, uplifting and singular experience. (Amy Brown)

Can a Redesign Make the Airplane Middle Seat Your Favorite?: Well, we think this is obvious — we all hate the middle seat, and we gather this article came up often in internet searches once passengers realized they were stuck in a “B” or “E” seat. But for one of our newest writers, this was among several gems she contributed to 3p over the past several months. (Roya Sabri)

JetBlue Aims to Diversify the Aviation Industry Through STEM Partnerships: The Tuskegee Airmen flew more than 700 bomber escort missions during World War II. They were the first group of African-American aviators in the U.S. Army Air Corps as well as the only fighter group in the entire war to have a perfect record protecting bombers. But when they returned home, many couldn’t get a job in the airline industry. And decades later, African-Americans are still vastly underrepresented in the aviation sector. Here’s how JetBlue is striving to boost the career prospects for people of color who want to be pilots. (Maggie Kohn)

Image credit: Ørsted

Conventional palm oil production is a known social and environmental blight. For years, we've read about producers destroying biodiverse rainforests and peatlands, displacing vulnerable and endangered wildlife, mistreating local populations, and exploiting labor. The impacts of this ingredient are multiplied by its ubiquity. 

In the last few decades, palm oil farms have proliferated rapidly. Production is cheap, and palm oil is now a key raw material used in food, makeup, detergent, biodiesel and much more. But as unsustainable production has increased, so has the destruction of the ecosystems where oil palms grow best. The Amazon, its communities and its diverse wildlife have seen the brunt of this devastation.

In October, the Zoological Society of London (ZSL), an international conservation charity, published a deep-dive into the world’s most significant palm oil companies. The ZSL frequently publishes investigations into the transparency of business action via SPOTT, the Society’s “Sustainability Policy Transparency Toolkit.” The results of this study showed that most of the producers, processors and traders of palm oil are not living up to their environmental promises.

Of the 99 companies analyzed, the ZSL found that 65 percent have committed to zero deforestation and 58 percent have committed to respecting the rights of local communities. Yet only 22 percent of the companies say they can trace 100 percent of their raw materials to the plantations where they were grown. No company can trace 100 percent of its supply. 

Tracing agricultural commodities is notoriously difficult, but it's a challenge worth taking, especially if companies want to honor their public commitments.

"Achieving 100 percent traceability in the palm oil sector is difficult, as palm oil supply chains are extremely complex, with palm oil moving between several intermediaries before it makes its way into a product on supermarket shelves,” Michael Guindon, a palm oil technical advisor with ZSL, said in a press statement.

Guindon recommends companies that deal in palm oil survey their sources and consider whether they are supporting farms that align with their corporate values.

“Understanding one's supply chain is a critical step. However, it's only one piece of the puzzle,” he continued. “More importantly, companies should not only understand their supply chain thoroughly—they also need to use their buying power and work intensely to enforce the highest sustainability standards in every palm oil provider they do business with.”

Sustainable palm oil is vastly underutilized

Not every palm oil farm displaces biodiverse ecosystems or mistreats people. Around 20 percent of the world’s palm oil is sourced responsibly and sustainably. That may seem like a proportion that wouldn’t be able to meet global demand, but only half of the certified sustainable palm oil produced today is actually sold as sustainable, with the proper price premiums. Supply greatly exceeds demand. 

“Buyers don’t want to pay for it,” Simon Lord, chief sustainability officer at Sime Darby, the world’s largest producer of Certified Sustainable Palm Oil, told the Business Times from Kuala Lumpur. “There is increasing resentment among growers that the other actors in the supply chain are not stepping up.”

Palm oil that isn’t sold as sustainable gets pooled with non-certified oil. Consequently, farmers that are doing the right thing are losing out.

Misalignment of values and actions can cause mistrust amongst investors and customers

Consumer action has ripples across the supply chain. And on-pack messaging such as the green Certified Sustainable Palm Oil label allows customers to see when companies are taking the time and effort to deliberately source from sustainable farms.

For most companies, though, there is a misalignment between messaging and action. The ZSL found that only around a quarter of companies assessed have adopted transparent practices concerning their supplies. As an example, only 26 percent have programs that help high-risk suppliers become compliant with company sustainability policies. 

The ZSL emphasizes that supporting responsible palm oil production is the best way to achieve sustainability, to support farming communities and to protect wildlife.

In fact, turning away from palm to another vegetable oil could exacerbate environmental and social problems, the Society found. If grown in the right way, it insists, palm oil can be a highly sustainable commodity.

Oil palms use up to 10 times less land than other plants used for vegetable oil. They also require less fertilizer and pesticides and produce higher yields. 

Long story short: Companies need to step up and make sure they are supporting the right farmers, advocates say.

"Companies have a responsibility to ensure the products they're supplying are deforestation-free, preserve biodiversity, and respect the rights of workers and local communities,” Peter van der Werf, senior engagement specialist in the asset management firm Robeco's active ownership team, said in a press statement.

As the ZSL has proven time and again in its reports, industry transparency is lagging in many commodities markets. Since this summer, the ZSL has published three reports on three different industries using the SPOTT analysis. Each of these reports—on timber and pulp, palm oil and, most recently, rubber—revealed a notable lack of transparency about production practices. 

This should be a wake-up call to any company involved in palm oil or that uses palm oil—which includes half of the packaged items on supermarket shelves. The ZSL's advice: Trace to the source, whenever and wherever you can. If you don’t like what you find, begin investing in sustainable palm oil. Not taking action may hurt your brand image and your bottom line.

Investors, for one, are perking up to the problem. “Robeco has been engaging with the palm oil sector for nearly 10 years, and we have drawn a line for companies who are not willing to step up their game toward more sustainable practices by excluding them from our investable universe,” Van der Werf said. “At the same time, we are actively engaging with those we believe are capable of reaching the sustainability objectives we set by 2021."

Image credit: Pixabay

You don’t hear climate activists talk much about the insurance industry, but increasingly, they are. And now businesses — insurance customers — are joining the conversation. That’s why Lemonade is asking our fellow insurers to stop both underwriting and investing in fossil fuels.

As the ultimate manager of risk, the insurance industry quietly shapes modern society, deciding what type of projects can be built and operated. And, at its core, insurance is intended to help people in their most desperate time of need.

That’s why we were shocked when we realized the connection between our industry and the climate crisis. Just like how you can't really drive without insurance, coal plants can't operate without insurance. The Trans Mountain Pipeline can't be built without insurance, and offshore oil rigs can't drill without insurance. In addition, insurance companies invest their customers’ premiums into coal and other seriously polluting industries — and the scale for this is massive. In fact, the 40 largest U.S. insurers hold over $450 billion in coal, oil, gas, and electric utility stocks and bonds. They hold a bigger proportion of their investments in fossil fuels than average index funds. 

When we insure oil, coal, and gas, we  are also driving the current global warming crisis. That warming powers wildfires, hurricanes, and other climate-related catastrophes — the very things insurers (like Lemonade) insure against. 

Our homeowners have a unique stake in the issue, with weather patterns caused by climate change estimated to put $405 billion worth of housing stock at risk. According to a recent survey, 47 percent of homeowners are worried about having enough insurance to protect their homes from a climate change-induced natural disaster.

And it’s not just property that’s being destroyed. Those greenhouse gasses poison our air too, bringing premature death to millions, and visiting pain and suffering on millions more. In as much as such tragedies can be paid for with money, it is often health and life insurance companies that do the paying.

You’d have thought that self interest, if not the greater good, would dissuade insurers from backing the worst offenders. As Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org and Lemonade Giveback partner said, “It is a perverse loop that allows insurers to facilitate polluting projects that cause global warming while at the same time providing insurance against the climate impacts of these same projects”.

So, in 2018, Lemonade became the first U.S. insurer to commit to not investing in, or underwriting, all fossil fuels. To be paying for the damages of wildfires, hurricanes, floods, while simultaneously funding the very industries that are responsible for some of the worst of those damages, just doesn’t make sense to us.

But we’re a young company, and our actions will have the most impact if we’re joined by other, like-minded companies. Which is why we’re calling on other businesses, from all sectors, to raise a collective voice to encourage the insurance industry to move away from fossil fuels by signing onto this joint business statement. Many of you supported the global climate strikes - here’s your next opportunity for meaningful action. 

And for those in our industry who underwrite polluting projects (like coal power plants or tar sands mining) we have a simple ask: please don’t.

Lemonade is a Public Benefit Corporation, meaning we legally may (indeed must) consider the greater good of our decisions, even at the expense of near-term profits. We recognize other insurance companies operate in a more traditional legal framework, with a narrow mandate to maximize profits. But here’s the thing: the interests of our investors and our environment are not at loggerheads. It’s a false dichotomy. Doing the right thing benefits our customers and our shareholders and our future.

How often can you say that?

Image credit: Patrick Hendry/Unsplash

Once again, on this Black Friday, REI will shutter all of its stores, refrain from processing any online payments and will pay all 13,000 employees to once again #OptOutside with their friends and family. But this year, the outdoor clothing and gear retail says it is going several steps further: the company is asking all of those same employees and the 18 million members who belong to the co-op to fight to preserve the outdoors.

This weekend, REI is urging citizens to “opt to act.” The company is asking for a nationwide clean-up effort, with the goal to leave the outdoors better off than when people arrive at their favorite national or state park, or for that matter, any outdoors space. According to the company, employees have already been opting to act when it comes to clean-up, collecting tons of garbage.

Included in this effort to “fight for life outdoors” – is the long-term revamping its linear business model to a more circular one in which returned and used items are bought and sold; taking on waste; and eliminating unnecessary packaging used to store and ship its products.

“As a single company, our impact is limited, but as a community, we can drive change that powers meaningful action beyond our walls,” REI’s CEO Eric Artz said in a public statement. “As a co-op, we know that many people taking many small steps together can add up to big changes. Collective intention will drive collective impact.”

REI’s refusal to join in the Black Friday madness sets it far apart from other retailers - some open their doors on Black Friday as early as 5:00 a.m., and of course there are the culprits who open their doors on Thanksgiving day. True, to their credit, many leading retailers say they will not be open on Thanksgiving day at all. That list includes Costco, Lowe’s, Nordstrom, Staples and TJ Maxx. Patagonia, which in recent years has been a Black Friday outlier, will also close its doors on Thanksgiving – its brick-and-mortar stores will be open on Friday, but according to a chat bot on the company’s website, the company isn’t offering any deals or special sales.

Nevertheless, REI stands out for taking a stand against crass consumerism and overworking retail workers to the point of exhaustion.

On the flip side, the struggling retail sector can find hope – surveys suggest that Gen Z and millennial shoppers will fill up stores’ aisles over the holiday weekend.

Image credit: REI

As our technology steadily advances, we find more problems with the state of our environment and the impact we've had on our planet. Luckily, technology also gives us the means to make a course correction and try to reverse the damage already done. The mere idea of this feat is incredible, but we'll get nowhere if the general populace and large corporations don't work together to see things through.

One option that's starting to become a bigger and bigger trend is meat alternatives in our diets. Veganism has been known as a healthy alternative but cutting meat out of a diet completely isn't for everyone, whether it comes down to personal preference or a health-related situation. Now, the trend has grown due to recent technological breakthroughs allowing us to use plant-based meat substitutes that taste the same as (or sometimes better than) the real thing.

The main thrust of the argument is that these dietary options are better for the environment. "Going meatless" may indeed help reduce some of the pollution and environmental damage brought by keeping and slaughtering animals for meat. However, a deeper look reveals many of these alternative products take an environmental toll of their own – and their health benefits may not be what they seem.​​​​​​

What is the meatless revolution?

As we look closer at the impact we have on our planet, we search for ways to minimize the damage. Meat production is a major contributor to the world's carbon emissions and pollution, not to mention the reports of animal cruelty or proof that more land is being used to raise food for our livestock than for human consumption. Then, we come to personal health risks that one may face from eating too much meat and not enough other food products.

None of this is to say that eating meat is a bad thing, because it's not. Plenty of studies assert that humans need the substances that meat provides. However, overconsumption of meat has taken a negative turn for everyone as a whole. While vegetarian and vegan options are there, trying to convince a large number of people to suddenly switch their diets is just not feasible. That's why plant-based meats are earning so much attention.

Two companies have already started sweeping the market on plant-based meats. The first, Impossible Foods, has developed fake meats that provide the same taste and texture as the real deal. The other company, Beyond Meat, focuses on putting plant-based chicken strips and other products in grocery stores like Whole Foods – and is on the menu at fast food cult favorite Del Taco. This trend is gaining traction, but we need to know if it's better.​​​​​​

Are meat alternatives causing more pollution?

Water and energy are still necessary for creating these plant-based meats, so there's pollution being created even with the alternative. However, the differences between plant-based options and traditional meat options are compelling.

The Center for Sustainable Systems at the University of Michigan took a look at Beyond Meat's Beyond Burger, which contains a quarter-pound of plant-based meat. They then compared this burger's entire geological footprint to a normal quarter-pound beef burger. The Center found that the Beyond Burger produced 90 percent fewer greenhouse gasses, needed 46 percent less energy to create, used 99 percent less water and used 93 percent less land than the traditional alternative.

As of 2017, there were more than 17 billion heads of livestock in the world, or triple the human population. The Water Education Foundation reported that it takes 2,464 gallons of water to produce one pound of beef in California. In 2000, the U.S. Geological Survey reported that 40 percent of the country's freshwater went to irrigating crops used solely to feed livestock. Even our topsoil is eroding faster than we can replace it — at about 7 billion tons per year — due to the kinds of crops that only livestock can consume.

This all sounds like good news, but the data-collecting mission is far from over. Many more independent studies are required before we can make sweeping judgments about the chances of reversing climate change by transitioning to meatless meat, according to Ricardo San Martin, a research director at the University of California at Berkeley. Similarly, Michael Siegrist, a professor at ETH Zurich, says the crux of the problem is the demand for meat in the first place rather than the form that meat takes.

Siegrist also pointed out there's not enough data on consumer buying patterns to determine whether plant-based alternatives are replacing animal flesh in consumers' diets or merely complementing it. It's possible these companies are compounding the known problems rather than reducing them.

In short, while meatless meats may not contain animal products, they still require a huge industrial footprint for growing, processing, packaging and distributing them. Not enough information is available on the speed of this transition, and manufacturers haven't taken meaningful strides to curb consumers' demand for meat products in the first place. Anything less is a "solution" that benefits meat — or meatless — companies first and the planet second.

Is the planet benefiting from going meatless, or only big companies?

The meatless revolution may or may not be a cynical ploy from major food companies to make more money off of trends. Still, it's helping raise awareness of animal agriculture's untenable ecological and climate footprint. Companies like Impossible Foods pioneered these meatless alternatives ostensibly to help the planet and our health. However, there's little doubt the industry benefits when consumers believe the burden of change rests on their own shoulders.

Individual consumers can make changes — and even an impact. However, making consequential changes to how big industries operate as a whole can stave off environmental collapse — only 100 companies emit more than 70 percent of global greenhouse gases. The product itself doesn't matter if the apparatus supporting it requires sweeping, structural reforms.

Tyson, Smithfield, Perdue, Hormel, Nestlé and other major food companies have started marketing meat alternatives to get in on these latest trends. Popular items include plant-based burgers, meatballs and chicken nuggets. The growing demand for alternatives isn't going unnoticed, and this sort of reaction means that a voice, at the very least, being heard somewhere. If the trend continues, big meat companies could turn their attention more to alternatives than traditional means, which will lead to less pollution on a gigantic scale.

While meat is still a healthy part of most diets, overconsumption on a global scale has caused a lot of problems. Buying more vegetables, fruits and grains and a little less meat can tell big companies to start switching to other, more profitable options. It would be foolish to expect the animal agriculture industry to help reduce demand for its own products, however.

The benefits of plant-based meat have implications in combating hunger around the world and helping out the environment at a critical hour. While we have the means to help our planet, our approach must be more nuanced than "eat this, not that."

Image credit: Impossible Foods

Auto makers introducing electric vehicles (EVs) are increasing their efforts to address consumers’ ongoing hesitation against EV ownership. Concerns of many prospective customers remain centered on range anxiety and how to manage EV charging during longer trips away from home.

Key to allaying these concerns is taking the guesswork out of where to plug in. While Tesla built out its Supercharging network, and Ford, in announcing its forthcoming Mustang Mach-E, is partnering with third parties in giving access to charging networks, long-time EV manufacturer Nissan is bolstering its efforts to ensure LEAF drivers have more options when the time comes to charge up.

This week, Nissan, which has been selling its pure EV LEAF since 2010, announced it is providing new LEAF drivers access to EVgo’s United States charging network through a new program,“Nissan Energy Perks by EVgo.”

Nissan’s new program will provide $250 of pre-paid charging credits with EVgo, which according to a press release, is the largest and most reliable public EV fast charging network in America. The announced benefit will fall to customers who purchase a New Nissan LEAF or LEAF Plus in participating markets on or after November 1st, 2019.

EVgo’s network comprises more than 750 public charging stations hosting in excess of 1,200 fast charges, while through roaming agreements, LEAF customers will have access to more than 30,000 public EV chargers, which Nissan claims is the largest of any U.S. partnership.

The roaming agreement comes by way of access to the ChargePoint network, providing more than 28,000 Level 2 chargers. Level 2 charging operates at 240 volts, as compared with 120 volts for a standard household wall outlet and provides a useful charge to an EV in a considerably reduced amount of time. Under the program, EVgo will also hold roaming agreements with Electrify America and EV Connect, further augmenting the charging network available to new LEAF customers.

Additionally, through this program new LEAF drivers will have access to more than 300 fast chargers through Chargepoint’s network as well as through EVgo’s and Nissan’s commitment to install a further 200 direct current (DC) fast chargers across the United States. DC fast chargers are superior to level 2 chargers - the former, according to information on EVgo’s website, allows up to 90 miles of range in just 30 minutes of charging. 

Nissan says this program builds on a 6 year partnership with EVgo, while claiming that more than 100 million Americans live within a 15 minute drive of an EVgo fast charger. 

Nissan has sold more than 430,000 LEAFs globally since the vehicle was introduced at the beginning of the decade. The automaker should score recognition as the first automaker to introduce a mass production fully electric vehicle in its lineup, a model that has remained in continuous production since then. 

Now in its second generation, the LEAF is one of the more affordable EVs on the U.S. market, starting at $29,900 for the 150 mile range version. The longer range LEAF Plus, starting at $36,550, will go 226 miles between charges.

Image credit: EVgo

Arthur Potts Dawson is a rock star in the United Kingdom’s food scene. Dubbed the “The Original Green Chef” by celebrity-chef and former boss Jamie Oliver, this no-holds-barred cook and restaurateur, who has cooked for real-life rock stars and royalty, is quickly becoming a voice for sustainable food on the global stage.

Dawson was at the 2019 James Beard Foundation Chef Action Summit hosted earlier this fall at Princeton University. During the Summit, he called on fellow chefs to sign on to the Chefs' Manifesto and commit to a future where ingredients are grown with respect for the environment, where no good food goes to waste, and where everyone, everywhere, enjoys the nutritious meals they need to grow and thrive.

“Chefs are just one part of the food system but we have a voice and it needs to be a positive nurturing voice, making up in part for the past 50 years of the food industry’s negative impact on the environment and contribution to food waste,” Dawson said from his London office during a recent interview with TriplePundit.

Arthur Potts Dawson: reduce the food sector’s global impact

For Dawson, who credits the birth of his first child as making him aware of the connection between food and the planet, his mission is simple: to minimize the impact of the food business on the planet. 

Dawson’s message comes as scientists highlight risks to global food security due to environmental practices. Among the recommendations in the Special Report on Climate Change and Land, released in August by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is the need for Western countries to do more to replace, or at least partially shift, their high-meat diets with plant-based alternatives. In October, scientists warned that there will need to be a global shift to a “flexitarian” diet to help keep the global temperature increase from breaching the 2C° limit agreed by a number of the world’s governments.

Beyond doing what’s right for the planet, going green may also be the smart move for restaurants. Research shows that millennials are seeking food that’s natural, organic, and locally sourced, and want to know how it affects their carbon footprint.  

Greening the food supply

For Dawson, his job is more than simply encouraging customers to eat more “veg,” it’s about serving food – including meat and poultry – that has been produced in efficient and eco-friendly ways and taking steps to reduce food waste.

“Everything in nature is used up in a closed, continuous cycle, with waste being the end of the beginning, and that’s been something that’s been nurturing me for some time,” Dawson said in his 2010 TED Talk. “If we don’t stand up and make a difference and think about sustainable food … then we may fail.”

Dawson first worked in some of Britain’s most iconic restaurants, including London's Michelin 3-star La Tante Claire and later, Cecconi's, one of London's oldest Italian restaurants. He then designed and created what have been called “sustainably aware urban restaurants,” Acorn House and Water House. These restaurants include rooftop gardens, low-energy refrigerators and “wormeries” in which composting worms live and help convert organic material such as fruit and vegetable scraps, garden greens, and animal manure into valuable compost. The restaurants also purify their own water on-site, recycle all kitchen and packaging waste, and maximize the use of natural light so electric illumination is needed only in the evenings. The Water House goes a step further by using a heat-transference system from a nearby canal to provide hot and cold water and air conditioning, while the electric kitchen incorporates water-based fridges that make use of hydroelectricity.

So far Dawson’s recipe is working; restaurant critic Giles Coran described both Acorn House and Water House as the most important restaurants to open in London in 200 years – in other words, since the time of King George III was on the throne.

“Today, there is a sustainable restaurant on every corner [in London],” Dawson told 3p. “But I’d like to think we started a new genre….that we were at the head of the sustainability curve 14 years ago.”

Beyond the U.K., Dawson partnered in 2018 with the UN World Food Programme to launch a global challenge, called Recipe for Disaster, to end food waste. He also has joined with the UN’s ActNow climate campaign to inspire people through his recipes and cooking to enjoy “sustainable, climate-conscious and delicious food.”

Taking the green revolution mainstream

Dawson is also using his passion and expertise to help large retailers and restaurant chains make sustainability a core ingredient in their food offerings. 

Working with the Swedish retailer Ikea for the past three  years, he was instrumental in the introduction of its new veggie hot dog, made with kale, lentils, quinoa, onions and wheat protein. The company says it introduced the new option “because simple mathematics tell us that plant-based foods need less resources, less water and less soil to feed just as many, while making a smaller carbon footprint.”

Dawson also helped Ikea introduce a plant-based version of the company’s iconic Swedish meatball, available both in its bistros and for sale in its store. According to the retailer, the carbon footprint of the new veggie balls is 20 times smaller than its traditional meatball cousin.

Dawson is also working with the fast-growing U.S. burger chain, BurgerFi, which offers consumers burgers from “free-range, humanly treated cattle that have never been exposed to steroids, antibiotics or growth hormones.” The company also boasts an eco-in-restaurant design, including 10-foot fans, which the company says consume 66 percent less energy than alternative sources.

“When it comes to helping companies, it’s not only the products, but the whole internal brand,” Dawson said.

While it will hopefully be many years until Dawson hangs up his chef’s hat, he is already envisioning what he would like his legacy to be. “I hope I can say that chefs were able to push back and drive change inside the culinary field, and in peoples’ minds… but to get there, the world is going to have to go through a deep revolution.”

Fortunately it is a revolution that, thanks to Dawson and other chefs like him, has already begun.

Image credit: James Beard Foundation

Here at TriplePundit, we’ve long been tracking the disruptive impacts that climate change could have on coastal communities here in the U.S. Now, the private sector could be inspired by the latest round of private-public partnerships focused on the need to further secure resilience in communities most at risk. As a reminder, resilience can best be defined as the ability to bounce back when the worst happens; to that end, these grants are designed to help ensure that the most remote villages and largest cities can do so.

Last week, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF), Shell and TransRe announced $30 million in grants for coastal resilience projects in 23 U.S. states and territories. The 44 grants, which by and large have received bipartisan support, will generate an additional $60 million in matching funds, a significant amount for projects such as restoring or expanding coastal marshes, wetlands, dune systems, mangroves, and barrier islands, all important components to creating more resilient communities along the country’s coasts.

The list of recipient states and territories includes many that are familiar from recent storm damage stories: Puerto Rico, Louisiana, Texas, Florida and the Carolinas. Other communities along both the west and east coasts will also receive grants. A few of these grants, however, warrant a closer look because they highlight some important resilience issues.

Alaska and resilient indigenous communities

Two grants will go to the indigenous Alaskan communities of Point Hope and Shaktoolik, both of which are facing extreme challenges from climate change. Decades of fossil fuel extraction coupled with the impacts of warmer winters and rising seas are having a direct impact on these communities.

No one is more at risk than the indigenous communities living in Alaska’s coastal towns and villages. Alaska has already seen some of the first American climate refugees. The 400-person town of Kivalina (shown in the photo above) and neighboring 350-strong Newtok (which 3p covered back in 2014), home to Inupiat and Yupik people, respectively, needed to be moved because, according to then-U.S. Secretary of Interior Sally Jewell, they are “washing away.” The monetary costs are estimated at $100 to $200 million per village (and 29 more of these communities are listed as in imminent danger), but the cultural and social costs to the families that must be uprooted from their homes is immeasurable.

The Point Hope grant will provide funds to survey what the greater need is to bolster the natural infrastructure of that community. It specifies that native knowledge and expertise will be used in the determination of the best potential shoreline sites. The second grant will fund the building of a storm surge berm (similar in concept to what has been proposed for New York City) between the village of Shaktoolik and the Bering Sea that will use nature-based local materials to restore the coastal dune habitat.

Midwestern coastal resilience

When people talk about coastal resilience, they usually do not consider the the internal coasts along the Great Lakes. But these waterways are under severe pressure from climate change. According to the latest National Climate Assessment, the Great Lakes are facing a dire future, with Lake Erie topping the list of concern. Two of the three grants included in this round address needs on Lake Erie: one to restore a marsh and shrub-scrub peninsula in Michigan and one to undertake a resilience study in the eastern embayment in Cleveland Harbor in Ohio.

Climate change is already having an effect on the Great Lakes region, from lower lake levels and flooding to increased harmful algal blooms. More extreme weather events are threatening fish and wildlife as well as shipping, tourism, and recreation, not to mention the communities built along the shores of all of the Great Lakes. The government and its partners in the private sector that are funding efforts to improve resilience in these inland coastal communities together show a clear indication that the the scientific community sees this region as a target for coastal resilience.

Front-line climate change impacts require the greatest attention

Many coastal communities are already feeling the effects of climate change. Slowing or reversing its forward march is imperative, but it is also critical to improve the resilience of these regions to ensure their health and survival. After all, they are at the front lines. It is no coincidence that one of the partners in this group of funders is the reinsurance company TransRe, as it clearly understands the importance that effective planning for resilience has in reducing long-term financial risks.

“Coastal resilience is vital to the lives of millions of Americans,” said Mike Sapnar, TransRe’s President and CEO, in a public statement. “We applaud the progress already made by last year’s award recipients. This year’s projects are equally deserving, and we are pleased to support their important work.”

Image credit: Wiki Commons