Search

By Laura Quintana, VP of Corporate Affairs at Cisco

This is the first article in a five-part series on how a company or organization can develop, implement, and sustain successful public-private partnerships (PPP) that achieve large-scale impact.

To make true progress on the world’s largest societal issues — such as community health, economic development, and education and skills development—governments, companies, and nonprofits must work together. But, how does a company or organization develop and sustain successful public-private partnerships to achieve large-scale impact?

First, determine who to work with: Successful PPPs start with stakeholders who are engaged, committed, and able to execute a shared vision. Commitment and support from the highest levels of government and the institutions involved are essential, and all partners should have “skin in the game” to authentically demonstrate their commitment.

It’s important to use quantitative and qualitative research to assess partnership opportunities and risks, and to understand potential challenges that partners may face in fulfilling their pieces of the partnership. This might include market research and financial analysis to determine funding priorities, or a political landscape analysis to determine an approach that is appropriate and feasible given the political climate.

At Cisco, we’ve seen how leveraging innovative PPPs can achieve large-scale impact. Cisco Networking Academy, a world-leading IT skills and career building program, addresses the growing need for IT talent by equipping students with entry-level IT and 21st-century career skills.

The program is based on partnerships with more than 9,600 schools, community colleges, universities, governments, NGOs, and other organizations, which implement the program across 170 countries. Our global impact includes providing IT education to more than one million students each year — totaling 7.8 million students since 1997— and improving the lives and economic stability of communities worldwide.

As an example, successful PPPs with the highest level of governments and leading academic institutions across the world have helped Cisco scale inclusive social and economic impact. In Costa Rica, nearly 60,000 students have benefited from Networking Academy courses. Our 10-year partnership with the Costa Rica Ministry of Education has provided the country with an opportunity to thrive in the digital revolution.

The information economy demands an unprecedented level of technological literacy for workers, yet in many countries there is a severe shortage of trained networking and IT specialists. To enhance technical training, enable Costa Rica to compete in the digital economy, and improve people’s career options, the Networking Academy core curriculum is now taught in 102 of its 138 technical schools for students in the IT specialization.

Daniela Molina Quesada, pictured at right, is a Networking Academy alumna and a civil servant at the Caja Costarricense Seguro Social (CCSS), Costa Rica’s social security fund. After studying computer science at a rural technical school, Daniela enrolled in the Networking Academy program. She earned her technical degree in computer science, successfully completed all four Cisco CCNA modules, and earned a scholarship to study Systems Engineering at the Fundacion Omar Dengo.

Thanks to the Networking Academy program, Daniela was able to get a great job working in the Department of Technology Management at CCSS.

“Cisco was the first door that led to a whole new world professionally. Thanks to Cisco, I was given a job opportunity that has been one of my greatest achievements. Every day, I apply the knowledge I gained from Networking Academy, and this experience undoubtedly led to my ability to get a job that I love,” said Daniela.

Daniela has been at her job for nearly six years and currently supports more than 35,000 network users at CCSS. She believes technology and networking can transform lives and urges “everyone to get involved in the world of networks and to be part of the Cisco Networking Academy community.”

Recognizing the need for digital skills in all career paths (tourism, management, etc.), the Ministry of Education plans to make Networking Academy courses available for all students in technical schools in 2017, regardless of their area of specialization. While Networking Academy is helping Costa Rica develop a workforce trained in essential skills, this partnership also led to a 2017 Letter of Understanding between Cisco and the government of Costa Rica. Working at a country level, this Letter of Understanding highlights Cisco’s role in helping Costa Rica realize its digital agenda by driving digital education, providing access to telecommunications services, and enhancing cybersecurity.

Win-win public-private partnerships play a critical role in achieving global scale and local impact. We have an opportunity to close the digital skills gap, promote equitable education, support economic empowerment, and address critical human needs – all by leveraging the strengths of the public, private, and nonprofit sectors and collaborating to create value for everyone involved. Successful public-private partnerships, however, are not one size fits all. An approach that incorporates best practices, including utilizing the strategy above, helps ensure that all partners, as well as communities, benefit.

To learn more, visit www.netacad.com.

Has your organization had success in choosing the right partners in a public-private partnership? Leave us a comment below, tweet at @CiscoCSR and stay tuned for next week’s PPP post on determining when and how long to engage.

Join us September 21, from 10-11 a.m. PT, for a #CiscoChat with PPP thought-leaders Laura Quintana, Vice President, Corporate Affairs at Cisco; Laurence Carter, Senior Director of Public Private Partnerships at the World Bank; Keith Davis, President & CEO of the Camden Dream Center; and Jen Boynton, Editor in Chief at TriplePundit.

Image credit: Flickr / Nguyen Hung Vu

The full damage wreaked by Hurricane Harvey won't be totaled up for days if not weeks, but thankfully the destruction so far has resulted in relatively few fatalities. The impact on energy infrastructure, though, is a different story. The storm hit southeast Texas, a major hub of the U.S. petroleum and natural gas industries. It stands as further evidence that the centralized model for fuel production and transportation is out-of-date, leaving the U.S. exposed to economic disruption and threats to national security. In the age of climate change, a more nimble and flexible approach is needed.

Analysts predict massive energy infrastructure disruption

Part of the disruption was preventive rather than a direct result of storm damage. When Hurricane Harvey grew from a tropical storm to a Category 4 hurricane, energy watchers were all in agreement: This one was going to be bad.

Petroleum and gas stakeholders began ratcheting down operations well in advance of landfall. In addition to offshore and coastal operations, some inland drillers also halted. Aside from any direct impacts, inland operators were concerned that transportation would be disrupted.

Those preventive measures alone caused a shakeup in the oil and gas market. The U.S. Energy Information Agency noted the importance of the Texas Gulf Coast and surrounding areas to the nation's liquid fuel sector:

The U.S. Gulf of Mexico accounts for nearly 20% of total U.S. crude oil production, and the Texas Gulf Coast is home to nearly one-third of U.S. refining capacity. As of Thursday, August 24, several oil companies had already shut in production from several facilities and had evacuated personnel from offshore platforms.

According to EIA, Texas and the Gulf account for about 50 percent of oil production in the U.S. and about 25 percent of natural gas production.

Analysts were also concerned that the South Texas Project nuclear power plant near Bay City would have to shut down. The plant's policy calls for shutting down when sustained winds reach 74 miles per hour, far below Category 4 force. As of Friday night, though, forecasters predicted that winds of only 40 mph would hit that area of the coast.

Although the nuclear power plant dodged a bullet, analysts were still concerned that more than 10 percent of the state's total population could lose power, due to downed power lines.

Energy observers also took a cautionary look at the burgeoning Texas wind industry. Coastal wind farms began ratcheting down in advance of Harvey, and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy noted that at least nine inland wind farms that could be in the storm's predicted path.

Bloomberg also noted that some wind farms in the storm's path could be idled for days instead of hours, as Harvey is expected to linger in the area rather than passing straight through. However, that appears to be a moot point.

With transmission outages widespread many areas evacuated, analysts anticipated that electricity customers would barely notice the turndown in wind power, if at all.

Hurricane Harvey hits

By Saturday, the impact on oil production was already significant, as vulnerable operations shut down in advance of the storm. CNN reported an analysis compiled from offshore drilling rig operator reports:

...it is estimated that approximately 24.49 percent of the current oil production of 1,750,000 barrels of oil per day in the Gulf of Mexico has been shut-in, which equates to 428,568 barrels of oil per day. It is also estimated that approximately 25.94 percent of the natural gas production of 3,220 million cubic feet per day, or 835 million cubic feet per day in the Gulf of Mexico has been shut-in.

Though the worst of Harvey's wind was over by Saturday, analysts remain concerned that the ripple effect of inland flooding would impact additional refineries in the Houston and Beaumont areas, with a consequent increase in gasoline prices in the eastern U.S.

Transmission was also affected, though so far not as badly as some had anticipated. As of Saturday morning ERCOT, the grid operator for much of Texas, reported "widespread transmission outages" with roughtly 140 circuits out of service by 6:30 a.m.

By Saturday evening ERCOT was estimating 300,000 without power. That's far below the figure of 1.2 million modeled by some researchers.

The energy infrastructure of the future

As of this writing, the extent of permanent damage to energy operations impacted by Harvey -- oil, gas, wind and solar -- is unclear.

The readily available information so far consists of power outages tracked by ERCOT, but those are local impacts. The precautions taken by wind farms also primarily affect the local grid.

The main problem underscored by Harvey is that Texas oil and gas operations have a significant impact on domestic energy markets far beyond the state's borders, and consequently a ripple effect on the national economy.

Since the 1970's, national attention has focused on cutting ties with overseas oil producers, but Harvey is just the latest in a string of damaging storms demonstrating that the nation also needs to reduce its reliance on domestic energy hubs as well (to be clear, realistically speaking that's reduce -- not eliminate).

The nation's electricity grid is already moving toward a more diverse and distributed model across many of the 50 states incorporating renewables and energy storage, but oil and gas stakeholders have continued on the centralized model in use for generations.

That could be on the verge of changing. For example, the mainstreaming of electric vehicles could help mitigate the national impacts of storm-related gasoline supply disruptions while creating favorable conditions for locally sourced, distributed wind and solar energy.

The emergence of second-generation biofuels could also help reduce the impacts of damaging storms on liquid fuel production, including gasoline, diesel and jet fuel.

The Obama administration began leveraging regionally grown biomass to promote the development of refineries outside of the conventional petroleum and gas hubs. As currently envisioned by the U.S. Department of Energy's Integrated Biorefineries program, the biorefinery of the future is capable of handling multiple feedstocks, which also helps to promote local fuel sourcing.

The Energy Department is also forging ahead with its Grid Modernization Initiative, which foresees more wind, solar and other renewables in the energy infrastructure of the future, helped along by new energy storage technology.

In a tragic coincidence of timing, Harvey gained force last Wednesday, and that same evening the Energy Department released a much-anticipated review of national grid resiliency. While many energy observers were concerned about the grid study's assessment of coal-sourced electricity, it actually makes a good case for integrating more renewables into the grid, helped along partly by electric vehicles and smart-charging systems.

Image credit: NOAA/flickr. Yellow indicates light from major cities.

 

Don't look now, but the Trump administration is doling out money for developing alternative fuel vehicles for mass transport.

This week, the Department of Energy's Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) announced that it would be awarding more than $13 million to projects that create alternative energy transport systems that can be used and promoted for community needs. The money will support five cost-shared community-based systems capable of developing "energy efficient mobility systems" such as "connected and autonomous vehicles ... alternative fuel vehicles and infrastructure including natural gas, propane, biofuels, hydrogen, and electricity."

Recipients of the funding are wide-ranging and include Seattle's Department of Transportation, which is investigating the use of EV vehicles; Austin-based Pecan Street, Inc., which researches alternative forms of transportation; and Kansas-based Metropolitan Energy Center, which is focusing on the infrastructure and requirements for alternative fuel vehicles in Missouri, Kansas and Colorado.

Alternative energy transportation may seem like an unlikely topic for an administration that has gone to the mat to oppose many of the environmental strategies of the former Obama administration (including his latest decision to re-review vehicle standards that would potentially cut back on carbon emissions ).

But encouraging the development of alternative energy technologies is actually the VTO's mandate. Last year it approved $18 million to support the development of plug-in technologies. Recipients included Odyne Systems, LLC in Pewaukee, WI, which is developing hybrid work trucks, and Blue Bird Body Co. in Fort Valley, GA, which specializes in the supply of school buses. The $4.9 million went toward developing a battery powered system that would reduce energy efficiency and could connect with the grid.

This year's recipients include projects that link clean city coalitions and communities with businesses that have the know-how to develop both EV fleets and the necessary infrastructure to expand their use.

A complete listing of the recipients and kinds of projects that are being funded can be found by visiting the VTO web page.

 

Image: Flickr / Misanthropic One

Biomimicry is increasingly becoming the go-to resource for solving technology's biggest problems. From the gecko's sticky webbed feet to the kingfisher's needle-shaped beak, Mother Nature's resources seem inexhaustible.

Even the intriguing and mysterious concept of artificial intelligence is based on biomimicry. The idea that the human psyche and physique could actually one day present the perfect model for how to overcome man's greatest frailties is an example of nature and and human ingenuity working together.

And so is, remarkably, the lowly slug. The slinky cousin to the garden snail actually has its own fan base: ecologists and technology experts that spend hours classifying and studying this odd, shell-less mollusk in its own habitat.

"Slugs, like every living organism in an ecosystem have a role," writes the authors of the website SlugWatch. "As well as providing a crucial food source for other wildlife, many species are key composters, helping to breakdown decomposing vegetation."

But when it comes to medical science, it seems, their real gift isn't its appetite but its stick-to-itiveness.

Researchers from the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering and the John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS) at Harvard University have been studying the slug in hopes of creating an adhesive that can bind to wet and healing human tissue, such as after surgery. Many of the adhesives on the market, even those that can be applied to the human skin, are toxic to open tissue.

The Dusky Arion slug however, may offer an answer. Researchers have found that when threatened, the slug "glues" itself to the surface so that it can't be moved. In this case, its secret isn't suction, but sticky mucus secretion.

Scientists are hoping that they will be able to simulate the slug's technique in a medical adhesive.

And the slug isn't the only creature that is helping medical researchers solve tough problems. The sandcastle worm, often found in the intertidal waters of California, is teaching researchers how to create an adhesive that could potentially mend bones. The proteins it excretes are activated when they come in contact with the salty sea water and bond instantly. Scientists are working on reproducing this secretion for use in emergency rooms and other medical settings.

And while he may seem like an unlikely inspiration for biomimicry, Spider-Man -- and again, the resourceful gecko -- have been credited with the discovery of yet more ways for surgeons to improve medical healing processes. Dr. Jeffrey Karp, who is known around the medical community as a bioinspirationalist (a person who studies nature to find answers for scientific challenges) turned to the gecko's spiny pads to develop a medical tape that could be used inside the body, such as during delicate surgeries. He says he credits an article that drew a parallel between the gecko's sticky feet and the amazing abilities of the popular cult hero, Spider-Man for the breakthrough.

"When we look to solve problems, it’s not so we can publish papers and get pats on the back from the academic community,” Nick Sherman, a research technician who works at Karp Lab, explained to Guardian Newspaper writer Laura Parker. “It’s more like, ‘Is this work going to help patients? If not, how do we make it help them?'"

It's a sentiment that Spider-Man would probably agree with.

 

Images: Madame Tussaud's Spider-Man - Flickr/big-ashb; Dusky Arion Slug - Flickr/Anita Ritenour; Sandcastle Worm - Wikimedia/Fred Hayes/University of Utah

By Krystal Rogers-Nelson

The world’s most sustainable cities are redefining the building sector’s environmental impact. These cities are comprised of innovative buildings that incorporate the newest green technologies and building trends, putting environmental responsibility first. These cities have captured the world’s attention with their sophisticated designs, leading the way towards a greener future.

Green building standards play an important role in sustainability, like the LEED certification program from the United States Green Building Council. For green building companies and residential innovators alike, these are the top cities to watch.

Singapore’s Vertical Gardens

Singapore’s cityscape stands out for modernists buildings like the Colonnade or the Marina Bay Sands Hotel. But the newest and greenest buildings are drawing attention from builders looking to incorporate green space into the city itself. Massive vertical gardens built directly into a building’s façade is Singapore’s newest green building trend, and these impressive constructions are showing what’s possible for urban ecosystems.

Singapore’s 24-story “Tree House” holds the Guinness World Record for largest vertical garden. The condominium’s largest wall features 24,638 square feet of vertical green space, incorporating the benefits of healthy flora into the façade itself. Rooftop gardens are a long-standing staple of green buildings, but these vertical structures allow an even greater expansion of the benefits they provide.

The vertical gardens help to offset the building’s footprint by filtering pollutants and carbon dioxide and aid in heat absorption, which could contribute to cutting the building’s energy use by 15 to 30 percent. Vertical gardens are possible at every design scale, making them attractive for the commercial and residential sectors.

Stockholm’s energy conservation

Stockholm leads the charge for greener cityscapes. About 40 percent of the city is green space, and the city aims to be fossil fuel free by 2040, according to Mayor Karin Winngård. The city owes its world-leading sustainability profile to a cultural environment where companies are encouraged and supported in their efforts to innovate within the green building sector.

In energy use, two companies are making a splash with new green building tech. Ferroamp, a tech company founded in 2010, is building a smarter grid by integrating photovoltaic panels and energy storage into a single system. These building-scale power grids allow excess solar power to be more effectively captured and stored, increasing efficiency and cutting energy losses over traditional grid-tied systems. The process also streamlines expansion so buildings can invest in more panels and storage over time.

Climeon takes energy production to new territory with its hot water conversion systems. Climeon’s system harnesses the waste heat or geothermal heat to run turbines that produce electricity. This system produces free electricity from a process that already exists in every building in the world, providing a new innovation for the world’s green buildings to incorporate.

Climeon’s CEO Thomas Öström credits Stockholm’s support for green technology companies for allowing them to take chances in their energy-saving designs. With a low-risk environment, companies like Ferroamp and Climeon can break new ground in green building technology.

Zurich’s minergie principles

Zurich ranks highest on Arcadis’s 2016 Sustainable Cities Index and has led the way in sustainable building design for decades. The Swiss incorporate the Minergie principles into every major building project, a set of sustainability standards that applies to skyscrapers and residential households alike.

Zurich’s tallest building, the Prime Tower, was built using the Minergie principles, which reduce the average building’s energy consumption by one third. The Minergie principles showcase an essential and often overlooked component of green building design; these standards embed green technology and environmental responsibility into everyday practice.

The Minergie principles make Zurich a world leader in the green building sector. Minergie helps Zurich’s commercial and residential buildings embrace green building innovations like home automation technology, solar and wind energy systems, green roofs, innovative building façades, and energy-efficient cooling systems for projects large and small alike.

The future of green building technology

If there’s one thing the world’s most sustainable cities have in common, it’s their network of green technology companies. These innovative companies help these cities create a better future for people and the environment, and they demonstrate the importance of knowledge-sharing and data-driven innovation for businesses across the globe. Homeowners and business leaders alike can join the global green building network by contributing their knowledge and growing the world’s green economy.

Krystal Rogers-Nelson is a freelance writer living in Salt Lake City, Utah. Holding a Bachelor's degree in International Studies with an emphasis in globalization, she is passionate about building sustainable communities and protecting people and the planet. With 14+ years of experience working in the non-profit industry, she has expertise in sustainable agriculture, green building, corporate social responsibility, home automation and appropriate technology. You can find more of her work here.

Image credit: Flickr / Kai Lehmann

The U.S. Department of Energy has finally come out with a much-anticipated study of the nation's electricity grid, and it has some good news for the U.S. coal industry -- or not, as the case may be. As critics anticipated, the new grid study does make a partial case for the role of coal power plants in grid reliability and resiliency (one of the few advantages of coal). However, the report also notes that market forces and other factors put conventional coal power plants at a disadvantage.

Holy hot potato, Batman! That drops quite a challenge into the lap of President Trump and Republican leadership in Congress. Electricity costs have been falling at the wholesale level in recent years, even as coal has been squeezed out of the picture. Artificially propping up coal could translate into new burdens on ratepayers and/or taxpayers. That is political dynamite for a party organized around anti-government, anti-tax messaging.

So, what was the point of that new grid study?

What's wrong with the new grid study

Word of the new grid study broke last April, when Bloomberg obtained a memo from Energy Secretary Rick Perry ordering his staff to review the nation's grid from the perspective of baseload power. Generally speaking, those are large, central power plants that provide electricity 24/7 including nuclear and hydroelectric as well as coal and natural gas.

Baseload power plants of all types have been retiring at a rapid clip over the past several years. The question is what will replace them. Coal and nuclear stakeholders argue for more of the same, but a diverse, decentralized panoply of alternatives has emerged in recent years.

Critics of the new study quickly zeroed in on its apparent bias in favor of the coal industry. That's probably because Bloomberg kicked up a storm with this headline about the Perry memo:

Electric Grid Study Ordered by U.S. Energy Chief to Boost Coal

That raised reg flags all over the place, and not only on account of the implications for greenhouse gas emissions.

Conventional baseload coal power plants are not particularly appealing to the large and growing number of businesses eager to transition to renewable energy. A growing number of cities, counties and states are also aggressively seeking more renewables, prompted in part by a surge in community choice aggregation.

Even the natural gas industry put its weight against the study, arguing that baseload coal power plants are outdated.

Among other points raised by critics, one key issue was the Energy Department's decision not to enlist any outside grid stakeholders in the new grid study.

Perry appeared to accommodate that criticism in an introductory letter released with the study late Wednesday night (interestingly, there was no press release to announce the study).

In the letter, Perry describes the new study as a "staff report" to him (in other words, not to the White House) and a "starting point" for future conversations. That positioning seems to lower expectations regarding the force of the Energy Department's recommendations higher up the political food chain.

What's right with the new grid study

Though critics were concerned that the new study would be a thinly disguised shoutout to the coal industry, the Union of Concerned Scientists takes a look at the final version and reaches this conclusion:

The study cites overwhelming evidence from real-world experience, as well as multiple scientific studies by the department’s own national labs and regional grid operators, confirming that the U.S. can safely and reliably operate the electric grid with high levels of renewables.

USC lauds the report for projecting that the grid can support 80 percent renewables by 2050 without a loss of reliability, though the organization is concerned that the report did not include an depth assessment of climate change impacts on grid security.

Vox took a look at several other critiques of the report and provides this summary:

It has no legal force. It was only meant as advice and guidance to Perry and DOE. It mostly contains sensible recommendations that DOE, FERC, regional RTOs, and utilities have been working toward for a while.

As Vox sees it, the Energy Department was bound to "prioritize coal and nuclear plants" with or without the new report.

On the other hand, Perry's actions don't guarantee that coal and nuclear will get special treatment. As Energy Secretary he has taken great care to support Trump's rhetoric on coal and climate change in public, but he has also consistently -- and vigorously -- promoted the Energy Department's renewable energy programs.

Reading between the lines: bad news for coal

Regardless of its policy recommendations, the body of the report makes some observations about coal that put it at a sharp disadvantage in today's electricity market.

The full "Staff Report to the Secretary on Electricity Markets and Reliability" is well worth a read, and you can skip ahead to page 126 for the policy recommendations.

On your way, take a pause at page 60, where the report discusses several large coal plants set for retirement.

According to the report, environmental regulations are not the main force behind the decision to retire this group of plants. They were built under economic assumptions that were in place before the shale gas boom hit and wholesale electricity prices fell.

Therein lies the problem:

Although these plants were designed to operate around the clock, low wholesale electric prices tied to natural gas were a significant driver that caused them to operate at lower capacity factors.

The report provides this explanation from the Rhodium Group, which specializes in analyzing "disruptive global trends:"

For a power plant to make money today, it must be able to ramp up and down to coincide with the variable levels of renewable generation coming online. That makes combined cycle natural gas plants profitable, even at lower prices. [But] coal plants have relatively high and fixed operating costs and are relatively inflexible. They make their money by running full-out.

Against this backdrop, it's difficult to come up with a scenario that enables conventional coal power plants to continue operating without subsidies, either in the form of artificially higher electricity rates or taxpayer subsidies.

The report does provide a best-case model based on the continued operation of the existing fleet of coal power plants. However, the report essentially recommends more investment in efficiency improvements:

In a regulatory environment that would allow for improvement of the existing fleet, DOE should pursue a targeted R&D portfolio aiming at increasing efficiency.

It's not clear that efficiency improvements will enable the existing fleet to keep up, though the Energy Department has already put its money where its mouth is. On August 24, less than a day after releasing the new grid study, the agency announced a $50 million funding opportunity covering two coal power plants.

The aim is to demonstrate improvements in efficiency and emissions reduction, while also lowering the cost of coal-sourced electricity. That's quite a tall order, considering that coal will be chasing rapid drops in the cost of renewable energy even if natural gas goes up.

Not helping the grid study's case is a newly released Energy Department study that charts a path for halving the cost of wind energy by 2050.

Meanwhile the report recommends that the Energy Department focus its efforts on renewable energy integration:

Focus R&D on improving VRE [variable renewable energy, such as wind and solar] integration through grid modernization technologies that can increase grid operational flexibility and reliability through a variety of innovations in sensors and controls, storage technology, grid integration, and advanced power electronics.

In another bad indication for conventional coal power plants, the grid report recommends seeking new opportunities to apply the Energy Department's supercomputer resources in its on-going Grid Modernization Initiative. That program that places a strong emphasis on renewable energy as well as distributed generation and energy storage.

In his letter introducing the report, Perry also made it clear that there is no one size fits all solution for grid resiliency, a point of view that is tailor-made for renewables including hydro and geothermal as well as wind and solar:

America is also fortunate to have a variety of fuel sources. We need to consider how to use each effectively while recognizing our differences and unique state and regional circumstances.

In the same paragraph, Perry goes on to underscore the fact that someone, somewhere is going to have to pay for all this.

We also need to recognize the relationship between resiliency and the price of energy. Customers should know that a resilient electric grid does come with a price.

In other words, whoever has a plan to engineer new subsidies for baseload power plants should be prepared to assemble the political will to push it through Congress and any state-level barriers in the way, because it's going to cost.

Heads up, POTUS -- hot potato comin' at you!

Image (screenshot): US Department of Energy Staff Report, page 129.

 

Patagonia has been leading the charge against what the company says are relentless threats imposed on U.S. public lands from the Trump White House and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke. And now the outdoor gear designer and retailer is taking its activism further with a first-ever television advertising buy:

This is the first time the company has run a television ad campaign in 45 years of business. Patagonia felt compelled to purchase television and radio advertising time in Zinke’s home state of Montana in order to remind him of comments he made last year. “Our greatest treasures are public lands,” Mr. Zinke had said during a June 2016 speech. “It is not a partisan issue. It is an American issue.”

Zinke ended up deciding not to rescind any of the 22 national monuments under review. If he had, it would have challenged a 111-year-old law that gives the sitting U.S. president broad authority to protect public lands. As of press time, he proposed that four national monuments have their boundaries redrawn;  however, the report outlining the changes has not been publicly released. The lack of transparency has upset several senators, including U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, who said in a public statement, “The American people have the right to see his entire report. A proposal to strip protections from public lands should be made public immediately.”

Patagonia will also purchase airtime in Utah and Nevada, states where activists say national monuments are under threat. Although the fallout from the violence in Charlottesville two weeks ago has nudged companies to speak out even more boldly against the Trump Administration, Patagonia’s executives believe even more can be done to take a stand. “We don’t know of any other company currently running persuasion ads on television targeting the administration, and for us, this is an issue we have been advocating for since our founding,” the company said in a public statement.

The advertisement features the company’s founder, Yvon Chouinard. He minced no words when he offered his take on current goings on in Washington, D.C. “Public lands have never been more threatened than right now,” Chouinard explains during the one-minute segment, “because you have a few self-serving politicians who want to sell them off and make money.”

The television commercial ends with an appeal to citizens to text “DEFEND” to 52886 before Zinke announces his decision.

Patagonia has been sticking it to the Trump Administration from the beginning, and has also lashed out at Utah’s congressional delegation for insisting on a rollback on national monument designations. Upon the White House’s floating of proposals to sell off or downgrade some public lands, Patagonia and other outdoor retailers such as REI have launched public relations offensives demanding that these lands be accessible to all U.S. citizens and visitors.

After Utah’s state leadership continued to push for a reversal of federal protection granted for public lands such as Bears Ears National Monument, Patagonia withdrew from a major outdoor retailer trade show event scheduled earlier this year in Salt Lake City. Other manufacturers and retailers expressed their support; the Outdoor Retailer Trade Show will be held in Denver starting next year.

In summing up Patagonia’s stance, Chouinard was succinct and to the point. “This belongs to us. This belongs to all of the people in America. It’s our heritage. I hope my kids and grandkids will have the same experiences that I have,” he said as the advertisement concludes.

Image credit: Bureau of Land Management/Flickr

This week, Samsung introduced the Note 8 with much fanfare, only a year after the company endured a months-long public relationship nightmare due to exploding Note 7 smartphones. “A beast of a smartphone,” summed up one review on Wired.

At least one environmental group may agree with Samsung, but for a vastly different reason. According to NGO Mighty Earth, the Korea-based telecom is using proceeds from the sales of products such as the Note smartphones to develop palm oil plantations with some of the most notorious agribusiness interests in Indonesia.

One of those companies in particular, Korindo, has long been in Mighty’s cross-hairs. Korindo recently entered into an partnership with one of Samsung’s subsidiaries, Samsung SDS, to form a joint venture and compete within Indonesia’s logistics sector. Meanwhile, Mighty has accused Korindo of clearing 30,000 hectares of virgin rainforests, being responsible for at least 900 fires on land concessions dedicated to palm oil production and taking lands on which indigenous peoples have lived and worked without their consent.

Samsung’s relationship with Korindo comes as the latter has fomented protests in Indonesia and Korea over its ties to deforestation in regions such as Indonesia’s remote Papua province. To date, Korindo is not a member of the Roundtable on Responsible Palm Oil (RSPO), so the global sustainable palm oil governing board has no way to launch any punitive measures against the company. Some major palm oil suppliers that are members of RSPO, such as Wilmar, have ceased purchasing any palm oil from Korindo. And other suppliers reputed to source palm oil from areas subjected to deforestation have had difficulty finding buyers on the global market.

Despite some wins on the deforestation fight in Indonesia, Mighty says Samsung’s ties to Indonesia’s palm oil industry puts more virgin forests and local communities at risk. But while many companies continue to spurn Korindo over its business practices, “Samsung continues to financially prop it up,” in the words of a Mighty spokesperson during an email exchange with TriplePundit.

Mighty representatives recently met with Samsung Electronics executives in Seoul to make their case that the company should rethink such business relationships in Indonesia. Samsung’s executives told Mighty that they were only a 20 percent investor in Samsung SDS, the subsidiary partnering with Korindo. “We don’t think this is entirely true,” the Mighty spokesperson explained to 3p, “and regardless, that figure shows they have a lot of influence.”

Samsung representatives also told Mighty that Samsung SDS is an independent company; therefore, their corporate governance laws prohibit them from intervening in any Samsung SDS’s decisions. Mighty countered that as Samsung Electronics is a 20 percent shareholder of the company, it has leverage. The executives told Mighty’s representatives that they agreed to meet with Samsung SDS and suggested the subsidiary talk to Korindo and would keep the NGO updated. Mighty claims that Samsung SDS has not yet established any contact with the NGO, and Samsung SDS representatives have still issued any response to the organization’s letter.

Mighty has determined that some palm oil plantations in the island of Sumatra are owned by Samsung’ subsidiary Samsung C&T, which the company’s representatives insist is also a separate company from Samsung Electronics. Samsung C&T reportedly has shares in Samsung Electronics, but not the other way around. “We tried to convey that this is of material business interest to Samsung Electronics, given that consumers concerned about Samsung’s links to rainforest destruction and human rights abuse will not differentiate between the various Samsung companies,” said Mighty’s spokesperson.

Samsung affirmed these various companies are separate entities in a statement a spokesperson sent to 3p:

"We are not aware of any direct transactional business relationship between Samsung Electronics and Korindo. It is our understanding that a separate and independent Samsung company, Samsung SDS, has entered into an agreement with Korindo, which is at a very early stage at this time. Samsung Electronics does not operate or participate in Samsung SDS' day-to-day business. Samsung Electronics is fully committed to delivering innovative products that improve the world with the belief that the global community and the planet constitute our ultimate stakeholders."

In recent years, Samsung has found itself on both sides of deforestation controversies. The company says it has supported an environmental group in Brazil that strived to stop deforestation and protect indigenous communities in the Amazon region. But Samsung has also acknowledged that it had sourced tin from Indonesian mines that may have had ties to child labor and deforestation.

In the meantime, Mighty has enlisted the support of consumers to pressure Samsung to rethink its business relationships, by both an online petition campaign and social media. Mighty says that so far, 73,000 people have called on Samsung to cut their ties to Korindo.

 

Image credit: CIFOR/Flickr