Search

The target of two million electric cars within the next eleven years has been set by one of the world’s biggest environmental campaigning organizations. 

A report from The Climate Group, which has centres in New York and Delhi and is headquartered in London, covers the commitments of 23 of its member companies. 

These companies aim to switch 145,000 vehicles in 66 countries to electrical power by 2030, avoiding production of more than 6.6 million metric tons of greenhouse gases, equivalent to the carbon emissions of 1.9 million UK households.  

The group brings together 31 large companies with a combined revenue of more than $500bn (£385bn, €439bn). 

The group, a non-profit formed in 2004, which calls its emissions project EV100, is the secretariat of the Under2 Coalition, an alliance of state and regional governments worldwide committed to cutting emissions to zero by 2050. 

The coalition consists of more than 200 administrations in 43 countries. These countries contain 1.3 billion people, about 16 per cent of the world’s population, and represent nearly 40 per cent of the global economy. 

Among the group’s members, the Ikea company, now renamed Ingka, is reported to be committed to zero-emission last-mile deliveries in five large cities by next year. It has just reached this goal in Shanghai.

Ingka’s objective is particularly relevant in Amsterdam, which will have a practically zero emissions policy in its city centre by 2025. If Ingka does not comply, its vehicles will lose direct access to more than 390,000 households and will lose $30.2m in annual turnover. The company regards its commitment as future-proofing. 

EDF, the French electricity provider with a large government stake, intends to have 31,000 electrically powered vehicles within eleven years, 27,000 of them in France. Its customers would be served by 75,000 charging points and would have access to 250,000 interoperable chargers by 2022. 

The Paris city government has a parallel project to phase out all combustion engines from the French capital by 2030, ten years ahead of the national target. 

A German participant, the Bonn-based international logistics company Deutsche Post DHL, has introduced petrol-saving scooters, cutting fuel costs by 60-70 per cent and maintenance and repair bills by 60-80 per cent. 

In the US, Bank of America has installed more than 100 workplace charging ports since 2016, offering a free service to staff, complementing its low-carbon vehicle reimbursement program, in which nearly 10,000 employees have taken part. Yet more charging ports are due this year. 

Another US participant, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the country’s largest provider of a transport infrastructure in a metropolitan area, will electrify all its vehicles by 2030. 

On the world stage more than two dozen cities are committed to introducing low-emission zones by 2030, and more than a dozen countries are to end combustion engine sales by 2040. More than half the countries have their sights on 2030, including Costa Rica, Denmark, the Irish Republic, the Netherlands and Norway. 

Inroads are being made in India too – the World Health Organization calculates the country has 14 of the world’s 15 most polluted cities. The Indian global IT company Wipro is switching its vehicles to electric power by 2030, first in Bangalore, Delhi, Hyderabad and Pune, and then in other countries where it operates. 

Helen Clarkson, The Climate Group chief executive, said: “With countries pledging to end sales of the combustion engine and cities bringing in low- or zero-emission zones, forward-thinking companies are getting ahead of the curve now by switching to electric vehicles.    

“The private sector has an instrumental part to play in bringing down emissions and cleaning up our air, and there are big opportunities for companies taking action now.” 

Pia Heidenmark, Ingka’s chief sustainability officer, struck a positive note: “Transforming our deliveries to zero-emission options is no longer a nice thing to do. It’s a must. 

“Air pollution is severe, for both people and our planet, and we need to take action. The transition will help us mitigate a huge business risk, as cities are restricting the use of fossil fuels. 

“It’s a win-win-win, and we see no reason to delay this.” 

Yannick Duport, EDF’s mobility unit director, emphasized the economic benefits: “EV100 is an extraordinary catalyser of energies towards a clean transport future. 

“EDF Group managed to introduce EV100 as a key performance indicator to the financial sector. Now EDF enjoys a €4bn ($4.55bn, £3.5bn) credit line indexed on three indicators of the group’s sustainable development performance, one being the achievement of our EV100 targets. 

“Isn’t that extraordinary? The merger of sustainability and finance in action.” 

The environmentalists have understandably raised the alarm. Present estimates are that air pollution causes 4.2 million deaths annually, costing the world economy $2.6tn. 

We are in the midst of a clean energy revolution. Renewables have never been more efficient or cheaper, and while some roadblocks remain (notably the scaling of energy storage), it’s clear that society is at a tipping point. In the coming years and decades, solar panels on rooftops will likely become more common than gas stations along highways.

Many companies and consumers have jumped onto the clean energy train, though some lingering resistance remains. For one, not all companies have committed to harnessing cleaner sources of power. A report from Ceres, WWF, Calvert Research and Management, and CDP shows that about 63 percent of Fortune 100 companies have set one or more clean energy targets.

Certain industries are also more welcoming to clean energy than others: 72 percent of consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies have made some form of sustainable energy pledge, whereas only 11 percent of energy companies have done the same. This isn’t so surprising, given that energy companies primarily specialize in fossil fuels, but it is a decrease from three years before. At that time, 25 percent of energy companies had committed to clean energy investments or climate change mitigation plans.

Renewables offer important advantages for a business’ bottom line, including ever-decreasing costs and even a boost for brand reputation and customer relations. But the business case is now even more compelling, which has nudged global energy heavyweights such as Shell and BP to get back into the solar and wider renewable markets here in the U.S. and abroad.

Cleaner is now cheaper

In most markets, renewable sources of power, including solar and wind, were not as cost effective as fossil fuels until the past few years, making it unattractive to businesses solely concerned about their bottom lines. As late as 2011, costs for solar energy, for instance, were as high as $100 per megawatt-hour (MWh). Solar is now, on average, $50 per MWh, and costs are continuing to decline. In comparison, coal costs approximately $100 per MWh to produce on average, while gas and nuclear cost $40 to $50 per MWh and $90 per MWh, respectively, based on the historically conservative U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates.

Worldwide, the story is much the same. In 2016, 167 gigawatts (GW) of renewables were installed. The costs were also far lower than previous investments, pointing to increased efficiency and improved technical know-how.

One way to take advantage of this rapid decrease in costs is for businesses to negotiate a power purchase agreement (PPA). Today, renewable energy providers have made it incredibly easy to negotiate PPAs, allowing client businesses to make commitments for power outputs as low as 2 to 10 MW, rather than forcing them to purchase high-capacity plans suited only for big businesses. As a result, smaller organizations can more easily meet their power needs with renewable energy.

PPAs have plenty of ancillary benefits as well. By contracting with a renewable energy provider, businesses do their part to curb pollution and even spur growth in related sectors. Over the next decade, solar panel and wind turbine technician jobs are projected to grow twice as quickly as any other occupation, by 105 percent and 96 percent, respectively. Increased demand from businesses, encouraged by a clear-eyed evaluation of the financial benefits of clean energy, plays a large part in this rapid expansion.

More and more, though, PPAs are unnecessary. Power markets are developing to the extent that a solar project can be built as a “merchant” or “hedged” project using similar structures to what would traditionally be done for a gas- or coal-fired plant. This opens up a much larger opportunity set for clean energy developers and financial markets and is an important trend to watch.

Consumer consciousness and good business

Over the past few decades, awareness of (and concern about) climate change has increased amongst the general population. A 2016 Gallup survey found that, in the United States, concern about global warming was at an eight-year high; 64 percent of the population worried a great deal or a fair amount about global warming. Furthermore, only about 10 percent of Americans believe that the effects of global warming will never occur; by far, the majority (59 percent) believe that such changes have already begun.

This is to say that increased awareness about the costs of life on a warming planet translates to business opportunities. A Deloitte survey found that 68 percent of electric power buyers are very concerned about climate change and their carbon footprints—the highest percentage recorded thus far. Additionally, some 70 percent of businesses reported that customers demanded that they drew at least some of their power from renewable resources.

This mindset extends beyond utility services. A 2017 report by Cone Communications found that 87 percent of consumers would purchase a product because a company advocated for an issue they cared about. This is particularly true for younger generations; a Nielsen study found that nearly 75 percent of millennials and 72 percent of Generation Z prioritized sustainability while shopping, compared to only 51 percent of Baby Boomers. Elsewhere in the world, that number rises: 88 percent of Indians and 85 percent of Brazilians feel that way about buying sustainably-produced goods.

Even in the face of recent U.S. actions including withdrawing from the Paris Climate Accord and slapping tariffs on incoming solar panels, many large companies are staying the course on clean energy. Large corporations like Nike and Amazon don’t simply sign onto pledges; they also walk the walk, signing long-term, large-scale PPAs with clean energy producers. Worldwide, it is estimated that some 20 gigawatts (GW) of wind and solar farms have been spurred on by big business—nearly 4 GW more than Britain’s total wind capacity.

In 2018, that number continued to increase. As of spring 2018, 36 agencies, universities and businesses have already signed deals for 3.3 GW, on track to shatter last year’s high. This includes big corporations like AT&T and Walmart, but also smaller companies, which benefit from ever-increasing supply (and as a result, falling prices).

Another major trend is the increasing use of solar and wind to power data centers for behemoths such as Google, Apple and Microsoft. These tech giants generally locate their data centers in remote locations close to the cheapest power sources—which are now solar and wind. Google and Apple claim to be 100 percent renewable users—good branding, good business.

The data make it clear that society and business are in the middle of a renewable energy revolution. As with other massive developments, participants who move fast are reaping larger advantages than latecomers. Thankfully, as energy technologies continue to improve into the future, there will also be plenty of space for businesses to join the new normal of an increasingly cleaner electricity market.

Image credit: Jem Sanchez/Pexels

Once again, WWF and other global organizations are reminding us to turn off our lights at 8:30 p.m. local time tomorrow, March 30, for Earth Hour. Switching off our lights for those 60 minutes offers a reminder of how important the flight climate change is—and also amplifies the clarion call to do what we can to protect the planet.  

For businesses, this is an opportunity to show a commitment to climate action, remind stakeholders that renewables have a role in powering our future, and engage with communities on issues including environmental stewardship. Companies that have supported Earth Hour in recent years include CBRE, The Body Shop and Ikea.        

For individuals, that hour can be used to reflect on what is personally important in a world that faces copious challenges. One can decide to go dark for wildlife, rivers, oceans or forest—or to focus on any environmental challenge personally important to him or her. And quite frankly, in a frenzied and hectic world, treating oneself to 60 minutes of darkness (or candlelight) on a Saturday night can offer a few precious moments of calm.

The 60 minutes of darkness will be commemorated in more than 180 countries and in thousands of cities and towns worldwide, from Abu Dhabi to Zambia. Universities, landmarks and office buildings are among the venues that will shut off all lights tomorrow evening. An Earth Hour map and local press accounts can suggest ideas on how Earth Hour will be celebrated locally.

To WWF, this is more than gesture—it’s a way to turn 60 minutes of quiet reflection into decisive action.

“By going dark for Earth Hour, we can show steadfast commitment to protecting our families, our communities and our planet from the dangerous effects of a warming world,” said Lou Leonard of WWF in a recent public statement. “The impacts of climate change are already all around us. The rising demand for energy, food and water means this problem is only going to worsen—unless we act now.”

Image credit: Unsplash/NASA

Given the urgent need to tackle climate change, governments are seeking public resources to mobilize far more private investment. Enter the Global Innovation Lab for Climate Finance (The Lab), which is incubating the next generation of climate finance entrepreneurs.

The Lab says it has incubated 35 business models and finance instruments since 2015, mobilizing over $1.4 billion in sustainable investment. The finance incubator recently announced its latest group of winners, six ideas targeting four areas where accelerated, large-scale investment is urgent: sustainable cities, energy access, blue carbon in coastal and marine ecosystems, and sustainable agriculture.

“Our goal is to provide more catalytic capital,” Dr. Barbara Buchner, executive director of the climate finance program at Climate Policy Initiative and director of The Lab, told TriplePundit. “There is a lot of innovative thinking among entrepreneurs in developing countries, but it’s difficult to get early-stage solutions off the ground.”

From challenge to opportunity

The Lab members include more than 60 institutions in government, development finance, philanthropy and the private sector, including the governments of Germany, the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Brazil, India and Rwanda. Organizations also partnering with The Lab include Bloomberg NEF, BlackRock, KfW Bank, International Finance Corporation (IFC), The Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) and the World Bank Group.

Previous winners include The Currency Exchange Fund (TCX), an innovative currency hedging solution, which has hedged $240 million of climate-related finance in 11 emerging markets, as well as CRAFT, the first commercial investment vehicle to focus on expanding solutions for climate resilience.

“The common denominator for the Lab members is that we see these solutions as not only important for the future of the climate but also as an opportunity. As investors make more and more of a commitment to put resources toward climate change, the Lab serves as a pipeline to identify promising opportunities for their investments,” Buchner told 3p.

Championing innovation in 2019

For 2019, the winning ideas include:

Cooling as a Service, which aims to decrease energy consumption and potent greenhouse HFC gas emissions from cooling systems in cities around the world by increasing the competitiveness of state-of-the-art cooling technologies. The project is led by Basel Agency for Sustainable Energy and Kigali Cooling Efficiency Program (K-CEP).

Restoration Insurance Service Company (RISCO) for Coastal Risk Reduction, a Conservation International initiative that seeks to restore and conserve mangrove habitats in vulnerable coastal areas, in contract with coastal asset owners.

Blockchain Climate Risk Crop Insurance, an automated weather-indexed crop insurance infrastructure that helps smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa increase resilience to climate change impact, via insurance that is transparent, affordable and pays out quickly.

The West African Initiative for Climate Smart Agriculture, which promotes climate-smart agriculture and resilient food supply chains across 15 countries in West Africa through grants for technical assistance and subsidized-rate loans or guarantees for smallholder farmers.

Breathe Better Bond, an IFC project that aims to drive finance at scale to emerging market local governments for investing in projects that will reduce urban air pollution, improving health and economic outcomes while mitigating greenhouse gas emissions.

Solar Securitization for Rwanda, which is supporting Rwanda’s national goal of 100 percent energy access by 2024 via solar asset-backed securities, the first such investment program within the country.

Following selection, ideas will move forward for nine months of expert development and support before launch, Buchner said.

“We select financial solutions that are sustainable and that can trigger investments in green finance,” she told us. “There must be a clear strategy to phase out private investment and achieve market viability, and to be able to replicate the instrument in other contexts.”

Rwanda turns to solar to attract investors

Ready to get down to work is Benjamin Nyakeriga, chief strategy officer at the Development Bank of Rwanda, one of the groups behind Solar Securitization for Rwanda. The country aims to achieve its energy access target primarily through off-grid solar solutions. However, Rwanda has faced difficulties in attracting capital to finance solar investments.

The sector, Nyakeriga told 3p, is perceived as one with high risk, due to a relatively new technology and a client base with little or no credit history.

“Securitization will address issues around difficulties in attracting sufficient investments to finance solar investments in what is perceived as a risky business model, involving relatively new technology, doing business in developing countries and clients with little or no credit history,” Nyakeriga told 3p. “This product will pave the way for more investments in the sector.”

The solution works through bundling receivables from solar developers, freeing up the working capital of solar companies so they can accelerate deployment, he explained. The securities, he added, will target different types of investors, from development banks to institutional investors to retail investors. The result will lower the risk perception of the sector while diversifying and expanding the pool of investment for solar energy, Nyakeriga said.

Tackling both social and climate goals

Nyakeriga said one impact of achieving that goal will be the displacement of 750,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions every five years. In addition, he ticked off a long list of positive socio-economic benefits: increased literacy in addition to other benefits resulting from household energy access; reduced pollution and improved respiratory health; expanded financial inclusion; a boost in reading hours for children spent studying; and, of course, job creation.

“We are confident about the relevance of the product in the Rwandan market, given the existing need for affordable electricity connections for households and enterprises without access to the grid in the country and the significant potential for growth in the market,” Nyakeriga said, adding that only about 20 percent of the target connections by 2024 have been made so far. 

Nyakeriga sees potential for the scalability of solar and other clean technologies across the region. “Not only will this activity increase liquidity and depth in the capital markets generally, it will also catalyze green financing from the private sector. Mobilizing financing to sectors and areas of need makes this a powerful tool and product that’s key in various green financing interventions.”

Image credit: IIP Photo Archive/Flickr

Food waste is a global issue as it poses widespread humanitarian, environmental and economical challenges. Yet it is often underrated as a serious threat. Those in the food and hospitality industry see how much is being wasted day in and day out, but few take a closer look at this waste. When sorting out the amount of food waste the industry throws out on a daily basis, imagine that every time you eat, you throw a fifth of your food away. Useable food is being wasted in abundance.

Some food and hospitality companies repurpose unused food through donations, as ingredients for other dishes, or by converting it into fertilizer or organic wastewater. But opportunities to reduce waste from the start could advance the fight against food waste even further. And one possibility is emerging, thanks to artificial intelligence (AI).

This is where Winnow Solutions is leading the charge. The United Kingdom-based company’s mission is to connect the commercial kitchen while creating a movement of chefs and, in the meantime, inspire others to realize that food is too valuable to waste. Winnow recently introduced a new AI-enabled product, Winnow Vision, to revolutionize food waste management. 

Winnow Vision uses a camera, smart scales and machine learning technology (the same type of technology found in autonomous vehicles) to recognize different foods being thrown into the bin. The system then calculates the financial and environmental cost of this discarded food so that it is understood by the commercial kitchen using it.

Winnow tested this product before its launch with partners Ikea and Dubai-based Emaar Hospitality Group. These early-adopter partners found that Winnow Vision surpasses the levels of accuracy possible by humans and enables chefs to run more efficient and more profitable kitchens.

Ikea has long been a champion of integrating sustainable practices into its operations. Testing Winnow Vision in its kitchens made for a natural fit. In 2017, Ikea announced its Food is Precious initiative, aimed at cutting food waste in its food operations by 50 percent by the end of 2020. As part of this initiative, Ikea became a member of Champions 12.3, a global coalition for fighting food waste hosted by the World Resource Institute.

Champions 12.3 is dedicated to inspiring action and accelerating progress toward achieving SDG Target 12.3 by 2030. Target 12.3 was set to address the $940 billion per year in economic losses caused by food waste.

As with most machining-learning technology, the more it is used, the more it ‘learns.' Winnow Vision can help to tackle the overproduction of particular food items as it learns what’s being tossed. Through this technology, businesses and chefs can adjust their food purchasing decisions accordingly. Winnow reports that this technology has helped commercial kitchens save more than $30 million in annual food costs, which equates to preventing over 23 million meals from going to waste. Winnow Vision is currently installed in more than 75 kitchens, and Winnow anticipates setting up the AI-powered bin in hundreds more this year.

By providing visibility into what is being wasted, Winnow Vision truly has the capacity to revolutionize commercial kitchens and reduce food waste.

Image credit: Timur Saglambilek/Pexels

It was 30 years ago this month that the Exxon Valdez oil tanker ran aground in Alaska’s Prince William Sound. The damage was horrific, starting with the spilling of an amount of crude oil that surged to the hundreds of thousands of barrels (approximately 11 million gallons). At the time, it was the largest oil spill in U.S. history, soiling approximately 1,300 miles of coastline in addition to killing and harming many species of wildlife. The cleanup (as pictured above, hours after the spill occurred) took years, and its effects still remain.

Reaction to the images of what was a once a pristine environment, only to become the site of dead wildlife and ruined coastline, was fast and fierce. Many consumers cut their Exxon gas credit cards in half or vowed never to buy that brand of gasoline again. Furthermore, Exxon suffered more than a hit to its brand reputation—lawsuits amounting to billions of dollars buried the company in litigation, though the final total the company paid in punitive damages over the next 20 years was much less, at about $507 million.

But there was another outcome of that environmental disaster that has left a far more lasting and beneficial impact. A small band of investors, who felt Corporate America could do better, pooled their talent and passion together. The outcome was the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies, later known as Ceres.

Ceres’ list of accomplishments over the past few decades is a long one. Just a few months after the Exxon Valdez spill, this group of investors partnered with environmental groups to formulate what was then quite a groundbreaking code of conduct for companies called the Valdez Principles, later to be named the Ceres Principles.

Ceres later had a leading role in establishing the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), which is now the globally accepted standard for ESG (environmental, social and governance) reporting. The Amsterdam-based group administers and updates a set of ESG reporting guidelines used by approximately 13,400 companies and organizations worldwide.

By the turn of the century, more companies considered environmental and social issues as factors that became central to corporate financial imperatives instead of externalities. The work Ceres has helped launch is now visible not only in frameworks that help companies report on ESG-related risks and opportunities, but also in tools that help these companies to take constructive action and even come up with new business ideas.

The people driving Ceres hardly rest on their laurels. Over the past decade, they have been pushing the global insurance industry to be cognizant of ESG risks, urged the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to take climate change disclosures into account, and given companies the resources to extend their sustainability efforts further than their operations and into their supply chains—and that is just the shortest of short-lists summing up Ceres’ accomplishments.

Mindy Lubber, CEO and president of Ceres, sums up the organization's continued advocacy work: “We must take stock of how far we have come, and how much we have achieved in tackling some of the greatest sustainability challenges,” she wrote in a recent blog post. “Investor action on sustainability is no longer a sideline endeavor.”

Image credit: National Archives

With the scale and reach of its agricultural sourcing, PepsiCo wants to help farmers across its global supply chain become more sustainable. This is especially true of female farmers, who face significant barriers in what is increasingly being called the “crop gap.”

In a wide-ranging interview with TriplePundit, Christine Daugherty, vice president of global sustainable agriculture and responsible sourcing at PepsiCo, explained why sustainable agriculture—and the empowerment of female farmers in particular—is a central focus for the company. 

Daugherty, who grew up in Iowa, right in the middle of the U.S. farm belt, says she recognized early on that the food and agricultural sectors were not making the most of “the immense skill and hard work that women bring to farming,” as she recently shared on the company's blog.

In developing countries, including regions from which PepsiCo sources crops, women represent 43 percent of agricultural labor. Yet, across these regions, much of the work women carry out day after day is done without training, key farming inputs, secure land rights, and often little or even no pay.

PepsiCo’s partnership with She Feeds the World

With its annual spend on agricultural products of well over $7 billion, PepsiCo is in a position to help change that situation. Earlier this month, the PepsiCo Foundation announced a partnership with CARE to tackle gender equality in agriculture with an $18.2 million investment in She Feeds the World, CARE’s food and nutrition security program aimed at benefitting 50 million female farmers in the developing world.

Research shows that if female farmers had the same access to resources as men, they could increase yields on their farms by 20 to 30 percent, potentially reducing the number of hungry people in the world by up to 150 million.

“One of the things we are super excited about is how we engage with women in agriculture,” Daugherty told 3p. “If we can engage more women in agriculture globally, we will see increased productivity.”

Showcasing innovation is unique for every farmer

As PepsiCo works closer with its supply chain, it's important for the company to understand that each region offers its own particular challenges, Daugherty said. 

“We adapt best practice to fit the crop and local circumstances,” she told us. “Larger-scale farmers in the U.S. or European Union, for example, probably use pretty highly-sophisticated technology like micro-applications of fertilizer, aerial technology such as drones to look at canopy cover, or precision agriculture that uses the internet of things and AI [artificial intelligence] to give detailed crop information. We want to know how they are using that to improve soil health and water stewardship.”

The approach will be different for farmers in developing countries who may need more support in accessing technology and in building capacity to adopt more sustainable agricultural practices, she explained.

That became clear during Daugherty’s recent trip to Southeast Asia, where she visited a female farmer in Thailand who grows potatoes for PepsiCo. The farmer wanted to increase crop yield while cutting costs. Like many in Southeast Asia, she used water-guzzling flood irrigation. With the help of PepsiCo and local partners, she switched to drip irrigation, which uses 60 to 70 percent less water. This was already a win, but then the farmer went a step further and installed solar panels to produce the energy necessary to operate the irrigation pump.

“That’s a great example of engaging at the farmer’s level and immediately seeing the yield increase with the next crop. And to showcase her innovation, we open up her farm to other local farmers who can see the benefit of advanced sustainable farming practices,” Daugherty explained.

PepsiCo has 95 of these demonstration farms globally and plans to expand further. On these farms, a portion of land is set aside to introduce new farming practices and technologies, like new irrigation systems or better nutrient management practices, while the rest of the farm acts as a control for comparison, Daugherty explained. The company constantly measures key sustainability and business indicators, including yield and quality.

“Peer-to-peer influencing is often the best means of creating change and advancing SFP practices and outcomes,” she said. 

The food industry is feeling the pressure

PepsiCo is not alone among leading food and beverage companies to prioritize sustainable agriculture. As TriplePundit has reported, the global food industry is undergoing increased pressure, not least from consumers, to make sustainability a key ingredient in feeding an estimated 9.8 billion people by 2050.

Unilever, for example, is certifying an increasing number of suppliers against its Sustainable Agriculture Code, and Danone is one of several companies promoting regenerative agriculture.

Such efforts are necessary to feed a world with a surging population, which will require more food. In turn, therein lies the risk of developing more farmland that could impose increased pressure on forests and other ecosystems. According to a recent report from the EAT-Lancet Commission on Food, Planet and Health, farmers are central to a global planetary health diet that is healthy for both people and planet. Just look at these following statistics. Agricultural land occupies nearly 40 percent of global land. Food production is responsible for up to 30 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and 70 percent of fresh water use. Land conversion for food production is the single most important driver of biodiversity loss.

Meeting the global food system challenge

“We recognize that our global food system faces significant challenges, with increased pressure on the land, climate change and food security, all of which are putting serious demands on producing food responsibly with the resources we have,” Daugherty said. “With our large agricultural footprint, we want to be part of the solution to make an impactful change on the food system.”

Daugherty says she is confident that modern agriculture is up to the task of increasing food production without expanding agricultural land.

“We can produce the food we need with the resources and the land we have,” she concluded. “But we will need to use innovative technology to help bring along our farmers to utilize less resources and make sure that we respect both environmental and human capital.”

Image credit: Caroline Joe/CARE

The news about the world’s oceans is not getting any better. Various studies continue to suggest that the effects of climate change will continue to have a negative impact on fisheries worldwide and could even lead to an eventual collapse.

Proponents of aquaculture insist they can be part of the solution and relieve the stress on the oceans’ fisheries—whether they are boosting supplies of perch in the Great Lakes region or contributing to the transformation of shrimp farms in Southeast Asia.

However, there is one stubborn challenge aquaculture continues to face: Questions fester around whether the amount of fish used to feed farmed fish (you’ve seen the diagrams at school—fish eat fish, as a gentle reminder) at aquaculture sites is also part of the problem, especially if fish meal continues to be used in many pork and poultry supply chains. This challenge, which the industry calls the fish-in, fish-out ratio, is the formula measuring the volume of fish-based feed necessary to harvest a fish or crustacean. The numbers are improving, but considering the precarious state of the world’s fisheries, many scientists and entrepreneurs are searching for a more sustainable and responsible alternative.  

The search is on for a solution. Meanwhile, the aquaculture industry claims that its supply chain is still far more efficient compared to other animal proteins, such as beef. Then again, some aquaculture installations use soy and grain as a supplement to feed their fish—and those choices could also lead to a long-term sustainability Pandora’s Box. In any event, the race is on to continue to find ways to make aquaculture more sustainable—especially as the world’s population continues to soar.

Now there is increased talk about using algae as an option to feed fish at aquaculture sites.

Algae, of course, was touted as the next great source of sustainable fuel, and while there are still ongoing projects, for the most part such talk has been muted.

These photosynthetic eukaryotic organisms (the scientific term for algae) are also being considered as a building block for synthetic, plant-based fish alternatives. That niche industry is still far beyond the land-based fake meat food products such as Gardein, Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods. Nevertheless, a plant-based canned tuna alternative may soon be at a store near you—one example being Good Catch, which scored almost $9 million in investor largess last year.

But if consumers will still be skittish for a long, long while about eating something associated with that mucky pond in the local park (even though it is full of nutrients), the aquaculture industry may soon turn their heads at the thought of fish feed that is renewable with less of an ecological footprint.

One company that sees potential in fish feed made from algae is Corbion. The Dutch food and biochemicals company, which also has an office in the Bay Area’s biotech hub, South San Francisco, is touting its AlgaPrime product. Corbion says this algae-based feed can supply those long-chain omega-3s necessary to cultivate healthy fish. In a recent press release, Corbion said one of its salmon-producing clients boasted a fish-in, fish-out ratio of 0.5 to 1—impressive when considering one global trade group estimated the worldwide fish-in, fish-out ratio for fish and salmon in 2000 was 2.75 to 1. Furthermore, Corbion claims its algae-derived feed can be ready in a matter of days instead of weeks or months.

As aquaculture continues to grow, watch for more fish-free feed sources to emerge on the scene—from carbon dioxide to insects and even canola. But considering algae can grow anywhere and everywhere, Corbion and its competitors may be closing in on the best possible solution to keep fish in our oceans—and on our plates.

Image credit: Aditya Siva/Unsplash

We keep hearing how more oil and gas companies are acknowledging climate change risks and are even planning for a low-carbon economy. So, is such a transition really underway? On one hand, we hear that solar and wind power are both now cheaper than coal—then again, coal-fired power plants actually saw their emissions increase last year, as recently reported by several news outlets.

According to one London-based think tank, not only do energy companies keep operating under business-as-usual, but they have actually been more aggressive in funding anti-climate change awareness campaigns.

InfluenceMap claims the world’s five largest publicly-traded energy companies have spent over $1 billion since the Paris climate accords were announced in December 2015. The group’s most recent report found that these companies have been flouting their climate credentials at the same time they were lobbying governments in order to secure and even expand their fossil fuel projects.

Edward Collins, an analyst at InfluenceMap and author of the report, said: “Oil majors are projecting themselves as key players in the energy transition while lobbying to delay, weaken or oppose meaningful climate policy. They advocate gradual implementation of market-based and technological climate solutions, but the latest IPCC report makes clear that urgent policy action and limitations on fossil fuel use are needed to avoid dangerous climate change.”

For example, InfluenceMap’s report found that during the four weeks leading up to the U.S. mid-term elections last November, ExxonMobil spent a combined $2 million on targeted Facebook and Instagram ads that showcased the benefits of increased fossil fuel production and, at the same time, actively opposed several U.S. states’ climate-related ballot initiatives—many of which failed to pass, in a victory for ExxonMobil and its peers.

Furthermore, InfluenceMap found that these companies spent close to $200 million annually in a bid to control or delay binding climate and energy policies, which have prevented various governments from reaching their pledges to reduce emissions. The think tank complains that while these energy giants publicly support programs such as carbon pricing, they are also lobbying against such policies in the halls of national parliaments and congresses.

The report also infers that leading global energy companies continue to amplify duplicitous messages. For example, two leading European energy companies have expressed more positive messages on climate policy since 2015. However, the same companies have also pushed for various policies that support a leading role for fossil fuels in the world’s energy portfolio, the think tank argued. In addition, these companies are still members of trade associations that vigorously campaign against any policies designed to tackle climate change, the report found.

Nevertheless, InfluenceMap revealed some silver linings in its report. The authors noted that there is more pressure coming from investors, political leaders and NGOs that are urging legacy energy companies to change their strategies. The Climate Action 100+ initiative, for example, has been successful in convincing institutions representing $30 trillion in assets to score written pledges from some energy companies to curb their lobbying efforts. Meanwhile, several U.S. states are filing climate change-related lawsuits against ExxonMobil and its competitors.

InfluenceMap and its allies are determined to continue their fight for sensible climate policy. “There is growing consensus on the need for urgent action on climate change, uniting scientists, business, investors and civil society in general,” Collins said in a public statement. “This report will provide them with ammunition to press for what the industry has been fearing for decades—meaningful and binding regulations on their operations in line with what is needed to address one of the most important challenges faced by humanity.”

Image credit: Zukiman Mohamad/Pexels

Los Angeles isn’t widely known for its labor movement, but there’s been a change over the past few years—and something remarkable happened this week that could end up being a step forward for workers in the gig economy.

On Monday, thousands of Uber and Lyft drivers refused to turn on their smartphone apps, declined to pick up customers and urged locals to take public transportation to work. They were joined by drivers in other California cities such as San Diego and San Francisco.

Part of the reason behind this one-day strike was Uber’s recent announcement that its per-mile pay would be reduced 25 percent across much of greater Los Angeles, including parts of Orange County. The optics of these ride-hailing companies—neither of which is profitable yet—becoming worth billions of dollars after their expected initial public offerings (IPOs) was also on many drivers’ minds. While many white-collar employees, especially those who joined either company during their early days, will become millionaires, those who drive for Uber and Lyft will continue to work at rates that aren’t much more than minimum wage after fuel, insurance and other expenses kick in.

“Lyft and Uber have seen it fit to subsidize their IPOs on the backs of the drivers,” one driver in San Francisco told Slate. “They want to generate as much profit right now as possible to make them look really attractive to investors, but they’re not doing that responsibly.”

The challenge for many drivers is that, as independent contractors (who submit IRS forms 1099 instead of W-2), they aren’t eligible for standard job protections such as minimum wage laws or worker’s compensation. So now, drivers in Los Angeles are demanding guarantees that they will make at least $28 an hour while urging Uber to reverse that per-mile rate cut. Both companies said they are considering revamping their drivers’ pay structures, and Uber told Vox in a statement that if things soon go according to plan, the company will again pay drivers rates similar to what they earned in September. But there’s one problem with such a concession.

“Drivers striking in Los Angeles said they don’t want to earn the same amount they did six months ago,” wrote Vox’s Alexia Fernández Campbell.

Meanwhile, Lyft has said it would roll out a suite of services, which the company described as “an ambitious economic initiative to help drivers succeed on their own terms.” Among the perks promised is a no-fee bank account and debit card that will add drivers’ fares to their accounts in real time.

As Fast Company’s Eillie Anzillotti incredulously asked, “What good is a free debit card if you don’t have enough income to fund it?”

Current macroeconomics tilt in the drivers’ favor. Low unemployment paired with a tight labor market means more workers are realizing that they have far more leverage than they did a few years ago. In the U.S. overall, there are more job positions open than workers willing to fill them.

Hence Uber and Lyft find themselves cornered into a position where they will have to figure something out, and figure it out fast. Plenty of observers have already criticized these companies “unicorn” status—that is, being worth more than $1 billion—as overvalued. But it’s not just the fact that these companies have been talking about going public for months, which of course adds to both the hype and expected market cap for these companies. Once Uber and Lyft go public, they will be accountable to shareholders as well as public disclosure laws mandated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Shareholders will expect growth, but that will be hard to come by if more potential drivers shun Uber and Lyft, which could tamper down any expectation of long-term success.

The result is that we have emerged on a new frontier when it comes to employee engagement. Companies have long realized that they need to do what they can to keep employees happy, especially as more millennials and Gen Z’ers join the workforce with expectations that they will work for organizations that aren’t only profitable, but also contribute to social good. In turn, we have seen more companies doing more for hourly workers, usually in the form of higher hourly wages, whether they work in retail or fast food—or as in the case of Starbucks, offering baristas once-unheard of perks such as sick time or even stock bonuses (in addition to healthcare and even opportunities to work on a college degree with no fees, long a perk of working at a Starbucks).

Now it’s time for companies to acknowledge that they can’t overlook workers in the gig economy, or as many prefer to call themselves, freelancers. Estimates of the size of this workforce varies, as the U.S. government does not keep excessive tabs. The total number could run anywhere from 57 million to even 75 million people, if you count jobs such as babysitting or running your own food truck.

Watch for more companies striving to make the gig economy more appealing, and not just these two ridesharing companies—the same could go for companies that run apps designed to deliver food or those that deliver services, such as TaskRabbit. After all, companies want to protect their profitability and brand reputation, but market realities will dictate that these companies will have to start treating these workers as people—even if hey are not technically employees.

Image credit: Pixabay