Search

By Shannon Houde

In today’s world, how you do a job is just as important as what you do. This is especially true for those in positions of influence within the sustainability impact sector. Herding cats through a complex change process while maintaining the bottom line? You’re going to need super-human levels of focus, calm and empathy.

Our ability to align our intellectual intelligence with our emotional intelligence defines our effectiveness as leaders. Businesses are waking up to this, and mindfulness is now taking center stage on the professional development agenda. Just ask Google, whose Jolly Good Fellow (aka Head of Mindfulness) has a job description that includes KPIs such as “enlighten minds, open hearts and create world peace,” which could be why its ‘Search Inside Yourself’ program is now publicly available to “bring the benefits of mindfulness-based emotional intelligence to your workplace or community.” General Mills, Target and Aetna are also hopping on the mindfulness train and setting up internal programs to engage employees. Proving the point is a recent study from the Institute for Employment Studies and Cranfield University’s School of Management, which found that mindfulness can be used to drive change in organizations. (They summed up their recommendations in this handy infographic).

Given that the science is so clear on the beneficial impacts of practicing mindfulness, it’s easy to see why major corporations are charging down this route. After all, who doesn’t want to cultivate awareness, humanity and perspective in the workplace and encourage a low-stress, high-satisfaction collaborative team?

Mental Fitness Training

There are lots of ways of describing mindfulness, but we like Shakya Kumara’s definition best: “It’s a form of Mental Fitness Training,” he says. “We know that we need a certain level of physical fitness in order to maintain our physical health and well-being. In the same way, we need a certain level of mental fitness, in order to maintain our mental health and well-being.”

Andy Hix of Zen at Work offers another helpful description: “It's the opposite of swearing at your computer whilst trying to do ten things at the same time! I think two of the biggest challenges in the modern workplace are stress and distraction,” he adds. “Mindfulness is the perfect antidote to that because it's a method of training your mind to be calmer and more focused. This means you feel better and get more done.”

Practicing mindfulness involves paying attention to our experience in a particular way. Bill George, a senior fellow at Harvard Business School writing for HuffPost, recalls an interaction with the Dalai Lama: “A few years ago when I asked [him] how we can develop a new generation of compassionate, mindful leaders, he replied simply, ‘Develop a daily habit of introspection’.” According to George, this daily habit can manifest as meditation, prayer, journaling, or, simply, jogging alone.

Essentially, these kinds of mindfulness practices train us to be fully present, help us reduce stress by letting go of anxious or negative thoughts while boosting creativity, decision making, focus, memory and other subtle skills that make a big difference at work. According to an article in the Harvard Business Review, mindfulness improves effectiveness by directing focus to the most pertinent task at hand and supports informed decision-making by helping leaders take the time to consider all of their options.

Make mindfulness happen

As Google and other progressive organizations know, mindfulness is a skill you can teach in the workplace. In order to become one of Google’s certified Search Inside Yourself trainers, I have to show 1,000 hours of meditation practice (that’s 4,000 meditations of 15 minutes each) plus attend a 5-day silent retreat. They are promoting the sustainability mantra “walk the talk.” Having practiced meditation and mindfulness myself for a number of years, these techniques are something I use to help clients tap into their own emotional intelligence. I have seen transformation in clients being able to build resilient teams that the drive innovation and deliver the impact our sector seeks, as well as reflect on how their own behavior connects with their personal goals and ambitions.

But if your organization isn’t offering Continuing Professional Development on meditation, don’t let that stop you making the first move yourself (London-based readers should check out this calendar for events in their area). As Shakya reminds me, mindfulness has helped the leaders he has worked with regain the ability to enjoy what they do after particularly stressful periods at work, and has supported others to cultivate a seemingly effortless management style of appreciation, empowerment and confidence. That sounds like a career goal worth training for.

Interested in exploring the benefits of mindfulness for individuals, teams and organizations? Walk of Life Consulting can help. Get in touch with us via www.walkoflifeleaders.com

Shannon Houde is an ICF certified executive and career coach who founded, Walk of Life Consulting, the first international professional development advisory business focused solely on the social impact, environmental and sustainable business fields.

Image Credit: PublicCo via Pixabay

 

The recently launched Climate Leadership Council (CLC) is just shy of six months old and it is already making a big splash. This week it launched a new ad campaign promoting its proposed "carbon dividends program" -- aka a carbon tax. According to a study produced by CLC analysts, the proposal could result in a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. that is almost twice the the rate that would be achieved under policies in force at the close of the Obama Administration.

That's quite a sell. To underscore the broad appeal of its proposal, CLC dubbed its ad campaign "The Consensus Climate Solution" and released a list of "Founding Members" who have signed on. Unilever, Procter and Gamble, PepsiCo and other companies that are making strides on corporate responsibility field are on the list, as are ExxonMobil, BP and Royal Dutch Shell. The list also includes noted renewable energy fan Michael Bloomberg and physicist Stephen Hawking along with Conservation International and The Nature Conservancy.

So, who could hate it?

The Climate Leadership Council plan

The CLC carbon tax -- or dividend plan, as CLC prefers, is deceptively simple. It rests on four "pillars:"

A gradually increasing carbon tax -- to be levied at the point "where fossil fuels enter the economy, meaning the mine, well or port."

Carbon dividends for all Americans -- "All the proceeds from this carbon tax would be returned to the American people on an equal and monthly basis via dividend checks, direct deposits or contributions to their individual retirement accounts."

Border carbon adjustments -- this refers to "trade remedies" that would encourage other countries to impose a carbon tax.

Significant regulatory rollback -- this involves eliminating practically all federal regulations including an "outright repeal of the Clean Power Plan." CLC also envisions that, "robust carbon taxes would also make possible an end to federal and state tort liability for emitters."

Initial reaction to the CLC plan is mixed

Now, let's take a quick look at that CLC study (here's that link again). It was released in coordination with the February launch of CLC under the title, "A Winning Trade," with this subtitle:

How Replacing the Obama-Era Climate Regulations with a Carbon Dividends Program Starting at $40/Ton Would Yield Far Greater Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions

The phrase "Obama-era regulations" may a appear to be a bit vague, considering that President Obama's signature emissions-reducing effort, the Clean Power Plan, stalled out in the courts and is all but dead under the Trump Administration. However, the study errs on the side of caution and factors in the impact of the Clean Power Plan as originally scheduled.

Nevertheless, although the CLC carbon tax proposal received some positive reaction, questions were immediately raised.

In a February 8th article, Scientific American explored some doubts about the effectiveness of a $40 per ton starting point for a carbon tax, compared to the effectiveness of Obama Administration policies.

Scientific American cited the Natural Resources Defense Council, which released a statement asserting that a carbon tax alone would be insufficient to reach climate goals, and an analyst with the Brookings Institute who argued that a set-aside to accelerate renewable energy R&D would be needed for the proposal hit its targets.

Also on February 8th, the top science journal Nature published a blog article by Nature Conservancy president and CEO Mark Tercek on the new proposal. In the article, Tercek applauded the proposal (note that at that time the Nature Conservancy was not officially named a CLC Founding Member), but he gently suggested that the devil is in the details.

Here's his take on the "pillar" the proposal that involves returning carbon tax revenue to consumers on a flat rate basis:

...For instance, low-income households spend much more of their budgets on energy than the more well-to-do. To make sure that the combined carbon tax and dividend does in fact have an equal impact on all Americans, perhaps the dividends should tilt a bit toward lower income families.

Tercek also argued that fuel efficiency standards should not be thrown out in favor of a carbon tax, asserting that over the next few years emission standards will "do more to reduce emissions in the transportation sector than a carbon tax," and because they save consumers money.

Reaction to the new ad campaign is not promising

The new ad campaign has provoked renewed criticism of the proposal.

One interesting argument against the flat rate dividend payments is provided by Huffington Post business and environment reporter Alexander C. Kaufman. According to one conservative critic cited by Kaufman, the flat rate would favor urban over rural dwellers:

"...say you’re somebody who commutes to work on the Washington Metro, as I do. I would get a check equal to somebody who has to drive a long way to work every day, who required a four-wheel-drive vehicle because he lives in an area with lots of snow and may have a job that includes heavy hauling, like a plumbing business.”

It's also worth noting that the flat rate of reimbursement does not reward households that invest in energy efficiency or that make an extra effort to conserve energy.

Environmental groups also dug into the plan again and found it wanting. Common Dreams cites Greenpeace...

"...Buried in pages of supposedly 'free market' solutions is a new regulation exempting polluters from facing legal consequences for their role in fueling climate change."

...and 350.org...

"Exxon is signing onto this carbon tax proposal because they know it's dead-on-arrival, but hope it will distract from the ongoing investigations into whether the company lied to the public and its investors about climate change..."

...and Food & Water Watch:

"...This plan being promoted by notable conservatives and their industry allies is particularly absurd: It would scrap many existing pollution controls—common sense rules that tackle carbon emissions at their source—in favor of a market-based scheme that would push added costs onto consumers, not polluters."

One positive note...or not

The highly regarded research organization World Resources Institute is an official Strategic Partner of CLC, and as such they came out with a statement to coordinate with the new ad campaign and the release of the Founding Members' names.

While the Institute's enthusiasm for the CLC proposal is clear, the organization also makes it clear that a carbon tax would have to produce better results than the regulations it replaces, and it cannot be a standalone solution:

“To avoid backsliding, existing carbon reduction policies should continue until a carbon price is put in place that will produce greater emissions reductions. In addition, complementary policies addressing other market failures and non-carbon greenhouse gasses will be needed.”

WRI notes that about 60 countries and sub-national jurisdictions already have carbon pricing in place, and public polling indicates bi-partisan support.

The Nature Conservancy also issued a statement on June 20th in support of the proposal, and in recognition of its now-official status of a Founding Member. Like WRI, The Nature Conservancy exercised a clear note of caution:

As a Founding Member, we support the enhanced dialogue around carbon pricing without endorsing the specifics of the carbon dividend proposal, including details pertaining to the role of other related regulations. We remain open to how best to design such policies and continue to believe there are a range of options for a price on carbon to reduce emissions.

These caveats about the CLC carbon tax from within the group's own stakeholders offer a warning sign that the proposal is at best an incomplete solution for climate change.

Image (screenshot): via Climate Leadership Council.

Tyson Foods announced today that amongst several new developments, it has rolled out a “high-tech, high-touch” system to improve animal welfare within its operations.

The new system has arrived almost one year after a secret video showing abuse at three of its Virginia chicken processing plants infuriated consumers and animal rights activists. One Tyson executive was moved to describe the video footage as “disgusting.” The video ultimately prompted the company to retrain poultry workers on animal welfare policies.

For years, Tyson has been under pressure for business practices that critics say have contributed to environmental degradation, concerns over food safety and animal abuse. The $41 billion food giant, however, has insisted in recent years that it is becoming a more responsible and sustainable operation. On one hand, the company claims it has been nudging its suppliers to adopt more humane approaches such as the phasing out of gestation crates. And Tyson has also raised eyebrows with investment strategies, such as last fall’s announcement that it purchased a stake in the plant protein start-up Beyond Meat. Technology also appears to be part of this shift with last week’s news that a former Hewlett Packard Enterprise executive was hired as Tyson’s chief technology officer.

It is on the technology front where Tyson says it can make strides on improving animal well-being. The company has implemented a system called remote video auditing (RVA) within 33 of its chicken processing plants. The system is basically a nannycam on steroids. The company Tyson has engaged to install this system, Arrowsight of Westchester County, New York, describes itself as a leader in motion and video detection technologies that are used by a wide array of food processing companies. Tyson says the adoption of RVA can help the company monitor whether safety procedures and animal welfare rules are being followed, while allowing immediate follow-up should the system raise any concerns.

Furthermore, the company says it will introduce a pilot project for controlled atmosphere stunning (CAS) at two poultry plants this year. The CAS process removes oxygen from the chickens’ atmosphere while they are still in their transport crates. Instead of being “gassed,” they die from the lack of oxygen, or anoxia. Oxygen from the chickens’ environment is removed and slowly replaced with a nonpoisonous gas that puts the chickens “to sleep.”

Animal rights organizations such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) advocate CAS over alternatives that are still the norm within much of the U.S. meat industry. One such process, electric immobilization, has long been opposed by animal welfare activists as they say it is far more cruel, and causes numerous problems related to animal welfare, economic, and workplace safety.

In a public statement, one noted animal well-being expert appears to be encouraged by Tyson's latest announcement. “Animal welfare is part science, part compassion, and it requires management’s commitment to learning, training, and constant monitoring,” said Dr. Temple Grandin, professor of animal science at Colorado State University who also serves an advisor to Tyson.

Image credit: Tyson Instagram

If you want to get an idea of just how passionate businesses and consumers are about net neutrality issues, you'll want to be online July 12.

Some of the world's largest companies and broadly backed NGOs are joining together to send a message to Federal Communications Commission Chairman and former Verizon attorney Ajit Pai: Net neutrality matters, not just to the convenience of home-computer users, but to the resilience of U.S. businesses and organizations. These organizations will be speaking out about the importance of net neutrality and staging actions that remind internet users just how much they rely on net neutrality.

Amazon, Kickstarter, Netflix, YCombinator, Vimeo and Etsy are a few of the companies that have signed on to the initiative recently, and the list is continuing to grow. Supporting organizations include the American Sustainable Business Council, American Library Association, Writers Guild of America West and Center for Media Justice, but also include a broad spectrum of social and humanitarian driven initiatives like Moveon.org and Rockthevote.

Individuals who sign up on the Battlefortheinternet.com site, which is operated by the nonprofit Fight for the Future, will have access to online tools to send their message to Pai, other members of the FCC and Congress.

In April, Pai said he would take steps to loosen controls on large broadband providers, effectively repealing protections that the Obama administration backed. Under the current structure, internet companies are regulated the same way as telephone companies, with limits on how they can charge customers, how they can provide services and what they can do with privacy information.

In May, FCC conducted a vote on whether to loosen controls and no surprisingly, the 2-1 result shaped out according to party lines, with the lone Democrat, Mignon Clyburn, voting to keep the rules as they were.  The result alarmed internet neutrality supporters, who vowed to mobilize further consumer protests.

Unequal access for low-income, say net neutrality advocates

Nevertheless, the FCC has already begun to roll back some of those regulations, making it easier for companies to sell private information for profit. But this latest proposal by Pai would remove the strictures that critics say keep the internet industry fair and accessible for all -- including smaller players. But it could also make it easier for companies to throttle consumers usage, forcing them to pay more to get more access. And that has many social advocacy organizations alarmed.

According to research released in January by the Pew Research Center, 9 in 10 U.S. residents use the internet. Since 2001, the percentage of low-income families (under $30,000) that use the internet has grown from 2 percent to 53 percent (that data is from November of 2016, the statistic is likely higher now).

Pew also tracked the increase in cell phone use and found that while the use of internet has increased on smartphones, the number of individuals in the U.S. who rely on smartphones exclusively for their internet access is still very small, about 1 in 10 consumers in total.

To internet neutrality advocates, those numbers speak volumes.

"Communities of color across the United States depend on an open Internet to thrive," said Malkia Cyril, executive director of Center for Media Justice. [T]he political voice and economic opportunity that the Internet enables must remain protected by Title II net neutrality."

Michael Cheah, general council for Vimeo, credits the open internet with Vimeo's increased growth and popularity.

"The FCC’s proposed rollback of the 2015 open Internet rules threatens to impede that innovation and allow a handful of incumbent ISPs to determine winners and losers. On July 12th, Vimeo will proudly join our fellow tech brethren to rally Internet users nationwide to demand strong net neutrality rules to prevent ISPs from manipulating Internet traffic," said Cheah.

Internet fraud?

Fight for the Future is also calling on Pai to remove and investigate 450,000 "fraudulent" comments on its website that the NGO says are fake.

The topic of public comments and the requirements that the FCC sets in order for consumers to leave those comments has become a hot-button topic these days, with some organizations accusing the FCC of making it hard for users to understand that when they log in and comment they are providing personal information that others could see -- including the user's email address, which becomes available when someone logs in to the government's API site.

The problem is, points out Jon Brodkin, an Arstechnica writer, the information isn't limited to just government agencies. Anyone, including public organizations and companies can access that information.

In this case, that may be a good thing, since it's increased transparency about who is leaving comments. Unfortunately, according to Fight for the Future, hundreds of thousands of those comments were forgeries using names that, as one individual put it, were "diametrically opposed" to their support of net neutrality.

"Whoever is behind this stole our names and addresses, exposed our private information in a public docket without our permission," Fight for the Future told Pai in a letter. It said there were at least two reports in which deceased individuals' names were used to support anti-net neutrality views.

It isn't clear whether the FCC will strike the comments, but either way, net neutrality supporters' views will likely be heard loud and clear on July 12 when a growing number companies chime in to let the Trump administration know that the country's largest businesses support keeping the rules that the Obama administration put in place.

 

Flickr image: Chris Scholz; Mike Licht

If a group of forward-thinking sustainable food leaders have their way,  the term “Reducetarian” will make its way into the everyday lexicon of those who care about the environment, the food supply and public health.

The Reducetarian Movement is a new effort to reduce consumers’ reliance on the large, resources consuming, animal agriculture business.  The term was first coined in a book by author and founder Brian Kateman in “The Reducetarian Solution.”

The premise is inclusive of all people who seek to cut down on the amount of animal products in their diet, regardless of motivation: health, the climate and/or animal welfare. Vegans and vegetarians lead the charge, but flexitarians and sometime vegans, Meatless Monday and Veganuary (Vegan January) proponents all have a place at the Reducetarian table. The idea is to include all people, regardless of motivation or degree, who  decrease animal products and increase the amount of plant matter in their diets. To really shift the food system to a more sustainable model, all groups must join together to bring about positive change.

Brian Kateman’s compelling TEDx talk explains the idea. As I watched, it struck me that what he was describing was exactly how I and many friends and colleagues frame our diets.

For two days at the NYU campus in the West Village, last month, The Reducetarian Summit examined this topic through a series of curated panels. The summit first covered the many unsustainable components of the typical American diet: too much meat, saturated fat, salt and processed food. Given our climate crisis and the ever-growing human population, we simply eat too much of the proverbial pie.

Nil Zacharias of One Green Planet says, “We’re 7.3 billion people today, and we’ll be 9.7 billion people by 2050. Animals, as a staple of our diet, are in high demand, China consumes a quarter of the world’s meat, which is double the U.S. consumption. India, too, is on course to grow their own demand for meat protein. To keep up with this rising demand, we’re going to have to double our meat production in the next 30 years.” The problem is it's unsustainable. Animal agriculture is at the heart of our environmental crisis.

He continues, “This one industry uses up more than half of our planet’s arable land, a majority of our fresh water, and drives more greenhouse gases than the entire transportation sector.”Ashley Schaffer Yildiz of the Rainforest Action Network put it frankly: “Animal agriculture is the single most water consuming industry in the world.”

Raising animals as a main source of food is inefficient, Dawn Moncrief of A Well Fed World explains, “Animals eat much more food than they produce.” More than a third of crops are being used for food and around 2/3 of available arable land is being used for animal farming. She says “Researchers have found that 4 billion people could be fed if we stopped diverting crops to be used large scale as animal feed.” Animal agriculture also contributes to the climate crisis through methane emissions and deforestation.

Becky Ramsing, of The Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future sums it up, “Without changing what we eat, we can’t meet the 2050 Climate Goals.

After we examine the problems with a mainly meat-based food system, we then look at ways to address, and solve the problems associated with it.

The consensus was centered around the basic inclusive idea of being a Reducetarian, in its many forms and iterations. Paul Shapiro of The Humane Society, says, “We need a social movement, not a social club.”

Food service providers like restaurateurs, small-scale community farmers, large-scale commercial food service companies and innovative plant-based food manufacturers all agreed that whatever is on offer, it has to taste good. Creating a connection between where food comes from and how is ends up on your plate is also paramount to generating change. Seventy-five percent of millennials say they’re willing to pay a little more for sustainably produced foods. We’re also a society that eats out-- a lot --on average at least 16 times a month.

Fast casual chain fresh&co is now incorporating more plant-based options into their offerings. George Tenedios, CEO and Founder of the chain, said that it’s a matter of “training consumers” that plant-based versions of their favorite foods can taste just as good. He said that the vegetarian version of their turkey chili, using plant-based meat substitute Beyond Meat, has done really well. The same goes for their vegan poke bowl.

Food and community always go together. When a community puts more emphasis on the varied spectrum of plant-based options, people grow to love and appreciate the offerings. Things like “The Edible Schoolyard” project and community small scale farms help the public understand where their food comes from.

Home Economics is not a common school subject anymore, but Karen Washington, of Rise and Root Farm, thinks it should be. Our society is currently extremely reliant on prepared foods and microwave meals and there are no longer working kitchens in schools anymore. This has created a great disconnect between what we eat and understanding the true cost of our food.

Dana Worth, of Impossible Foods says that to facilitate a shift we need to “make climate more personal." He explains that food culture starts with the chefs. Think the “cronut,” the flaky cross between a donut and a croissant that was available at one bakery in NYC. People waited in long lines just to buy one and get a taste. Now Dunkin' Donuts has their own version.

Companies like his, and like Hampton Creek, Memphis Meats, Finless Foods and other “cultured meat” and plant-based substitutes for the animal-based foods that we’re used to as a society, are both providing solutions and driving a cultural shift towards a more plant based food future. In addition,  cultural drivers like social media, particularly visual outlets like Instagram and Facebook, fuel interest and growth in a Reducetarian approach to what consumers may be eating in the next few decades.

 

Photo credits: Lisa Dietrich and Beth Bell, Green Product Placement

By Clementina Oliveras – Founder of Wander

The 2016 United States presidential election spurred an international conversation around the power of women and their role as leaders in politics, business and social affairs. The outcome of the election ignited not only a passionate outcry, but also a movement involving women of all races, ages and ethnicities. The Women’s March reflected the power to unite and fight for a common purpose, to overcome any challenge and have our voices heard.

The support that the Women’s March received put a spotlight on women everywhere and the works of powerful women leaders who have dedicated their life’s work to improving the lives of those around them. In fact, the U.S. Department of Labor recently reported that women own close to 10 million businesses, accounting for $1.4 trillion in receipts. Not only are these women entrepreneurs financially contributing to the backbone of our society, but in addition, their presence in leadership roles aid in the overall morale of corporate life.

Women are the heart of CSR

The National Association for Females Executives (NAFE) reported that women make up an average of 28 percent of the corporate executives across the country, including 30 percent of those reporting directly to the CEO and 41 percent of the executives in the top tenth percentage of all earners. Not only are women leading in executive positions, but women are also striving to bring humanity and social responsibility to the forefront of business models. Studies have shown that businesses with more women at the top are better at implementing corporate social responsibility than businesses that are led by men alone.

It might sound like a stereotype, but women tend to be natural-born nurturers. It is through their care for others that they bring this sense of responsibility to the heart of the businesses they work for and to the communities that they serve. When companies are founded on this idea of social responsibility from the very start, the true essence of the company pulses through every aspect of the business and gives life to a sustainable future.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) must be found at the core of the business in order to serve both those who work for the company and those who cannot help themselves in order to build a sense of unity that transcends the workplace. Businesses like S'well and Wander, both founded by women who were dedicated to creating an environmentally and socially responsible future with their companies, have found ways to contribute to society while ensuring long-term financial success at the same time. Evidence links companies who practice the shared value model to financial success, proving that when companies routinely give back to the communities around them, they will reap the benefits both morally and financially. There is no doubt that with women and CSR at the core of business strategy, companies will not only be successful, but will also promote a work environment that builds morale and long-standing relationships with both employees and customers.

Women’s impact on business

While there have been great strides to better accommodate women in the workplace, there is still more work to be done. For example, the U.S. is the only nation that does not guarantee paid family leave to working moms and dads. Federal law only offers eligible new parents 12 weeks of unpaid leave and job protection under The Family and Medical Leave Act. Businesses who make the necessary accommodations to meet the needs of women who are dedicated to building their business and the community around them will ensure a sustainable future for their company and, ultimately, society as a whole.

According to a recent McKinsey Global Institute report, $12 trillion could be added to the global GDP by 2025 by advancing women’s equality. This would not only benefit entrepreneurs and both public and private sectors, but also NGOs worldwide. Empowering women who are passionate about creating environmentally and socially responsible businesses will clearly be profitable for us all. For example, Opportunity International, one of Wander’s partners, is an organization that is dedicated to providing loans to people in developing countries and 95 percent of their beneficiaries are women. Businesses must lead the way to put gender inequality behind us once and for all and work together both male and female to ensure a sustainable future for our world.

The world will greatly benefit from women taking an active role in business, either in traditional business with strong CSR practices or triple bottom line businesses. Women must continue to break barriers and take on leadership roles to participate and transform the way we do business and ultimately enhance our social and professional environment around the world.

Image credit: Ged Carroll, Flickr 

President Trump's aides are reportedly frantic to keep him off of Twitter, and they may want to start thinking about cutting him off the phone entirely. Last week a phone call from Trump to the mayor of a tiny town in Virginia suddenly sparked a new burst of public attention on climate change and the risks that coastal businesses -- and entire communities -- face from rising sea levels.

If the story stays alive, that's an important shift. Literally for decades, environmental stakeholders have had great difficulty in communicating the urgency of climate action to the general public. In the U.S. that's partly due to misinformation promoted by the climate denial movement and its allies in government. If the plight of a small town can catch and hold the public eye with real stories about real people, the prospects for accelerating action on climate change in this country could improve significantly.

Trump to disappearing town: no worries

Last week's presidential phone call went to James Eskridge, Mayor of the town of Tangier. Apparently Trump was prompted to call after aides encouraged him to watch a CNN report on the effect of rising sea levels on Tangier Island, which houses the town.

The town of Tangier's recent voting history may have also had something to do with Trump's sudden interest. A reported 87 percent of voters in the town cast their ballots for Trump in the 2016 election.

During the 10-minute chat Trump reportedly offered no firm commitment to help the island, although it is losing land at an alarming rate:

Eskridge told Trump that he hoped the President would cut down the time on studies and maybe help with funding a sea wall. But he said they didn't go into detail about the wall, which the mayor says Tangier needs to survive, or about the jetty the island is expected to get next year for erosion of the harbor.

The President did not seem to worried, according to USA Today:

Trump told the mayor "not to worry about sea-level rise," Eskridge said. "He said, 'Your island has been there for hundreds of years, and I believe your island will be there for hundreds more.'"

Trump seems somewhat isolated in that opinion.

Situated in Chesapeake Bay, Tangier Island became the focus of news about climate change, coastal land loss and rising sea levels back in 2013 with the release of a documentary, "Tangier -- the vanishing island," which charted the effects of the disappearing coastline.

As an interesting side note, the film was produced by the documentary division of RT, the Russian media organization that has been accused of funneling propaganda to the U.S. and elsewhere.

Be that as it may, the RT documentary did not attract too much attention back then. A long form story on Tangier's plight by Al Jazeera in 2014 similarly sank into the media mix. So did the 2014 documentary Pieces of Tangier, created as an MFA thesis project by film maker Jenny Roberts.

Last week's phone call, though, could finally be a breakthrough. Reportedly galvanized by word of the Trump's call to Eskridge, last week Tangier town council member Anna E. Pruitt-Parks started a GoFundMe drive aimed at sending a copy of Pieces of Tangier to each member of Congress, and to the President and other top office holders.

The GoFundMe goal was set at $3,200. As of Monday the effort topped $4,500, and the story appears to be picking up steam in the media.

It looks like Tangier has finally found a powerful medium through which to communicate the urgency of action. The only question now is whether federal policy makers will come through with a solution.

Tangier, erosion, climate change and rising sea levels

To be clear, Tangier residents and elected officials are more focused on the wave-induced erosion aspect of their problem than on the linkage to global warming.

A 2016 report on Tangier by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, though, pins the problem on a combination of erosion, climate change and rising sea levels.

The study, published in the top science journal Nature, looks at land mass loss between 1850 and 2013 and reaches this conclusion:

Climate change and associated sea level rise (SLR) are already impacting low-lying coastal areas, including islands, throughout the world...Since 1850, 66.75% of the island's landmass has been lost. Under the mid-range SLR scenario, much of the remaining landmass is expected to be lost in the next 50 years and the Town will likely need to be abandoned...

The 50-year scenario is actually a conservative one. If sea level rise accelerates, within 25 years the town of Tangier would be uninhabitable, making it a canary in the coal mine -- an early warning sign -- of the devastation facing much of the U.S. coastline.

The researchers do recommend a series of resiliency measures that could preserve the island. These include breakwaters, dune systems, restoration of several low-lying marshes to their former state of ridges that rise above the high tide mark, and fertilization of wetlands.

The expense, however, is well beyond the means of local residents. The researchers estimate an initial investment of $20-$30 million. Virtually all of it would have to come from federal and state of Virginia taxpayers.

The alternative is to relocate a population of several hundred people, and that raises the question: is Tangier Island worth saving?

The climate change canary finds its voice

The proposed Trump budget and the small-government leanings of the majority Republican Congress indicate one answer to the Tangier question: no, it is unreasonable to expect U.S. taxpayers to bail out a few hundred people whose homes and businesses are in immanent danger of being washed away, because they could live and work elsewhere.

However, the GoFundMe campaign could add a significant new element to the mix of concerns. The Pieces of Tangier documentary explores the cultural life of the community, and in doing so makes a powerful argument that the impact of climate change is not only about the loss of property, economic life and ecosystems. It's also about the destruction of history -- in this case, the destruction of centuries-old American history in the very cradle of the nation's birth.

The Army Corps of Engineers researchers note that, along with the destruction of a "significant wildlife habitat," the destruction of Tangier Island will bring about the loss of the "culturally-unique Town of Tangier, the last offshore fishing community in Virginia waters of Chesapeake Bay."

The Tangier Island official website and tourist guide provides some insight into the value of Tangier Island to the Virginia tourist economy and its history. A 2009 article in Smithsonian Magazine also took note of the historical aspect. In the context of a shrinking local fishing industry that was already suffering the effect of pollution in the Chesapeake Bay, Eskridge makes this observation:

"Tangier is a living history. We've been doing this hundreds of years...We are really not that far from D.C. or Richmond, but you can come here and step back in time."

In a 2015 article, the Richmond Times-Dispatch noted that local graves and a historic fort were already under water in neighboring Uppards Island, which provides an important buffer for Tangier. The Times-Dispatch provided this background:

The settlement of Tangier and its history is long and storied, dating back to 1608. It includes the likes of Captain John Smith, a time when the island served as a military base for the British during the War of 1812, and a history of providing safe haven for slaves fleeing to freedom in the North.

Though modern communication has diluted Tangier's distinctive accent, the residents' unique manner of speech has also caught the eye of researchers.

The speech pattern is noted for its "backwards-talk," a kind of consistent deployment of sarcasm. If you hear any reports of Eskridge, Pruitt-Parks or any other Tangier resident lavishing praise upon President Trump or his Administration, take it with a grain of salt.

Image: via http://www.tangierisland-va.com/

 

Crowdfunding first started as way to launch an indie music album or tour, a company or service that had great potential but was shunned by investors, or perhaps fund a documentary with a cutting-edge theme. But as health care costs continue to increase, with more Americans perilously close to financial ruin, sites such as GoFundMe, GiveForward, Fundly and FundRazr are seeing medical fundraisers dominate the various fundraising stories on their sites. Facebook has recently entered this space, so now these appeals can be made even more directly.

The result is a rising cottage industry as appeals for financial assistance can generate companies like GoFundMe tidy profits. Some analysts, however, worry about the lack of oversight in this sector. The boost in popularity of these services raises concerns over issues such as privacy. While opponents of the current health care system say public programs should be replaced by individual responsibility, the evidence suggests that mounting health care costs make such a system unsustainable.

If the Affordable Care Act (ACA) ends up repealed, watch for more even more appeals to be posted online as health care costs keep spiraling upward. As countless news outlets have shown, despite the guarantees the ACA has supposedly enacted, including ending coverage exclusions for pre-existing conditions, a rare disease or medical procedure can wreck a family’s finances if they end up having to pay close to their maximum annual deductible. The winners, in such a system, are those who post that compelling picture, write that perfect narrative, or, pardon the oxymoron, score some luck and go viral with their illness. “Lawmakers who support policies that drive people to expose their personal lives in order to obtain desperately needed care should be ashamed of themselves,” wrote Michael Hiltzik in the Los Angeles Times.

Add Americans’ growing dependence on the sharing economy, or actually, the gig economy, and watch for these harrowing stories to surge in numbers and appear increasingly on your social media feeds. One study in 2015 suggested that 47 percent of Americans do not have even as much as $400 stashed away to cope with an emergency. And studies have shown that the poorer the person, the less likely he or she has a strong social network – and most funds for these medical care appeals come from friends, and then friends of friends.

Another problem is that as with any fundraising pitch, one needs both marketing savvy and have a compelling story in order to stand out. Otherwise, the reality is that an online audience already tiring of these incessant appeals for help means that few people who are in dire need will actually come anywhere near their fundraising goals. As Bloomberg noted earlier this week, the vast majority of medical crowdfunding campaigns fall far short of their goals; rare is the million-dollar windfall for a story of a woman’s cancer reappearing after she had quadruplets, or a celebrity cutting a check for a girl with leukemia.

For many fundraisers, being in the right place at the right time, or having a strong social network, makes all the difference.  Buzzfeed, for example, highlighted the case of an Arkansas woman who struggled at first to meet the fundraising goals she said she needed in order to stay at her home – and even, as she argued, stay alive. Then Kati McFarland confronted Senator Tom Cotton at town hall in February, the clips went viral, and the slow trickle of donations turned into $50,000 of her $63,000 goal.

But as a University of Washington Bothell study concluded, on average such campaigns only generate 40 percent of what they originally sought. Plus, there is always the risk that stories are embellished, which if revealed, can further sour an already jaded public.

“Crowdfunding narratives also distract from crises of healthcare funding and gaping holes in the social safety net,” concluded this study, “by encouraging hyper-individualized accounts of suffering on media platforms where precarity is portrayed as the result of inadequate self-marketing, rather than the inevitable consequences of structural conditions of austerity.”

The result is that there is an opening for businesses, whether or not they are in the health care sector, to find more creative ways to help society cope with healthcare scares. After all, insurance and pharmaceutical companies that come even close to appearing to profit excessively off of Americans’ misery will be subject to risks such as unrestrained outrage on social media as well as a tarnished brand reputation.

But so far, such business efforts have been spotty. CVS, for example, is working with a pharmaceutical company to help make insulin more affordable. The health insurer Aetna is partnering with a non-profit to help provide public health services to at-risk kids. At best, these services do not come close anywhere to filling the gaps in health care coverage and services; crowdfunding may be effective in providing hope, but the numbers suggest it is hardly an effective long-term solution. All of these efforts do well at alleviating some symptoms of our health care system's problems; none offer a real solution.

Image credit: Images Money/Flickr

To say the current presidential administration is “coal-friendly” is an understatement, but market forces have made it clear there is no room for coal in America’s evolving energy portfolio. Nevertheless, the loss of jobs in the industry is one that resonates with many, and various organizations and businesses are trying to fill that gap.

But what if we could find ways of using coal that could not only salvage some jobs, but also help the construction industry become more sustainable? TriplePundit recent spoke with Ohio University professor Jason Trembly, an associate professor of mechanical engineering and director of OU’s Institute for Sustainable Energy and the Environment. Dr. Trembly is currently researching alternative coal uses, one of which he says is close to being tested in a commercial setting. If these products can take off, the green building sector could benefit from a material that has long been blamed for being a major contribution to climate change.

Dr. Trembly’s vision for coal is one in which it is a material used in plastic composites. Plastic decking, usually made out of a composite of recycled plastic and wood, has taken off over the past decade. Various companies like Trex, ChoiceDek and Fortress Deck offer these products and they can be found for sale at big retailers including Home Depot and Lowe’s. The products are popular with consumers who may be concerned with deforestation or see the products as practical solutions to avoid splintering and dry rot. Companies in this sector also support waste diversion, taking used plastic and giving it a second life.

The problem is that someday, this decking will suffer enough wear and tear to warrant its replacement, or a new home or building owner may decide to tear out those planks and railings for an updated look. “From a sustainability standpoint, we’ve got all of this composite lumber out there,” said Dr. Trembly, “so the real problem ends up being that many of these projects have already been around a for a decade, but what happens at their end of life?”

Dr. Trembly argued that as more of these materials are placed, recycling them will become problematic. “You have to heat these planks up in order to separate the plastic resin from wood,” he explained, “but that degraded plastic is unlikely to be reused, so most likely what will happen is that it will end up in landfill or burned.”

These problems may not exist for another 15 years, but they will still be there; and landfill space then will be even more constrained and expensive. Whether these building materials contain infill of wood byproducts, or are entirely solid with wood and plastic mixed together, Dr. Trembly’s point is the sustainability of these products will be questioned once they outlive their use and need to be replaced.

Coal, however, could be the key material that could solve these future recycling challenges, and Dr. Trembly’s research indicates this once-common fuel could improve these products’ durability, and even lower their costs, as well.

Indeed, coal has similar chemical structure to wood. It is, after all, compressed biomass. But tests Dr. Trembly and his students have conducted that at the end of life stage, plastic composites comprising coal stand a better chance at becoming recycled because the coal and resins can be separated far more seamlessly. And coal could strengthen these products’ as well. “Coal is more thermally stable compared to wood, so we can heat it to a higher temperature before it starts degrading,” he said.

From an aesthetics perspective, coal-plastic composites could appeal to consumers. The leading composite decking companies often sell a few grades of these materials, as builders have their various needs and budget restrictions. Cheaper building products may warp or fray after years in the sun – or something like grease from a barbecue could stain this decking. Dr. Trembly says that can occur as wood has a relatively high water content – but replacing it with coal could solve those problems.

There has been talk of using fly ash, the waste product of building coal in building materials, but those ideas have never taken off. Dr. Trembly said his research indicates that it is not an option in decking materials, as coal in its original form is a much more durable material.

In addition, coal itself is been touted as a building material that could outright replace wood. One artist has even made sleek sculptures out of this cheap source of fuel. Those ideas, however, have not taken off.

For Dr. Trembly, the next stage is taking this idea out of the lab and elevate it to commercial testing. To that end, he is hopeful that he can start applying is research into practice at a plastic extrusion factory in the near future. “Hopefully, in the next six months, we will have real deck boards we can test out,” he said as he wrapped up last Friday afternoon’s conversation with 3p.

Image credit: Fiberon/Flickr

 

By Joseph Kirschke

It’s no coincidence that Chile, the planet’s leading copper exporter and home to some of its most intense geographies, is also one of the world’s fastest-growing green economies. But as global commodities markets rebound after a years-long slump, it will soon become something more: a climate-rich investor opportunity within COP21’s $13.5 trillion commitments.

In 2010, Chile faced an energy crisis: officials struggled with blackouts and mass protests while electricity grids were 65 percent dependent on fossil fuel imports. These days, Latin America’s sixth-largest economy is the destination for over 50 percent of the region’s clean tech investment. And Chile’s copper industry – which exceeds half of exports and 20 percent of GDP – has been playing an integral role.

Copper is one of the most important metals with myriad uses – from construction, railways and heavy machinery to power transmission and telecommunications to semiconductors, microchips, photovoltaic cells for solar panels and other high-tech applications. Moreover, alongside other "base metals" – encompassing iron ore, nickel, zinc aluminum and tin – the red metal is elemental to the world economy.

It was also the core of the greatest commodities super cycle in modern history, when much of China and India grew beyond recognition from 2000 until 2013 as global energy prices soared 260 percent. In the lean times since, mines worldwide have been working to streamline billions through wind and solar power – and Chile’s are on the cutting edge.

As one of the world’s first countries to privatize its energy industry, Chile’s high-quality infrastructure and progressive, investment-friendly government are enabling a ripple effect. In December, for instance, reports emerged that alternative energy use by mines is prompting fossil fuel suppliers to consider using renewables as well.

With 261 projects in the pipeline, Chile has also announced 60 percent of the energy serving Santiago’s subway system, Latin America’s second-biggest, will be solar and wind-driven by next year. In total, Energy Ministry officials have a 70 percent clean energy target by 2050 and want to extend the national transmission system to neighbors including Argentina, Peru, Ecuador and Colombia.

Extreme geographies have accelerated the narrative. The Atacama Desert of Northern Chile, 10,000 feet above sea level, most notably, hosts one-third of the planet’s copper reserves. And mining for copper has been a traditional strain on the region and the country – consuming 30 percent of national energy supplies.

But installations like the 2,620-photovoltaic (PV) one covering 36,000 sq meters at Codelco’s Gabriela Mistral mine are shifting the landscape. One of the world’s biggest solar projects, it generates 51,800 thermal megawatt Hours (TMh) annually, supplying 85 percent of the mine’s energy, in lieu of trucking 67,000 barrels of diesel to one of the world’s highest elevations.

Cerro Pabellón became South America’s first geothermal plant this year after the site was discovered by Codelco workers testing for water. The 48-megawatt (Mw) project now delivers electricity to the grid with a 165,000-household capacity – while underscoring Chile’s seismic “Ring of Fire” potential.

During construction by a subsidiary of Italy’s Enel Green Power and a state-owned hydrocarbon firm, meanwhile, local businesses grew nearby for the transport, food and other needs of 800 onsite workers. The nearby community of Ollagüe already enjoys solar-based electricity from another partnership between Enel and Phoenix-based mining firm Freeport McMoran Inc.

Other commercial industries are thriving within this growth. In particular, Google’s Chile unit now gets 100 percent of electricity from 776,000 solar panels in the Atacama which can electrify 250,000 homes. The El Romero plant, one of the largest and built by Spain’s Acciona Energy, powers a data center along with offices in Santiago. El Romero is grid-connected and covers 16 million feet and has created 900 jobs.

Chile is also turning to wind with a 52-project pipeline. One of its largest current installations is the 115-Mw El Arrayán Wind Farm co-owned by Antofagasta Minerals and built by California’s Pattern Energy. In a coastal region 250 miles north of Santiago, its Siemens-produced turbines serve 200,000 homes annually.

New regulations have been critical, along with growing distribution -- including a 1,865-mile transmission line underway connecting Northern Chile to the rest of the country. Timing is important: Chilean mining officials, for one thing, forecast industry-driven energy demands to increase 53 percent in 2026.

But it's technology and capital inflows from China, which consumes 90 percent of Chile’s copper and is also the world's clean energy leader, which will be a true game-changer. In addition, Beijing’s “One Belt One Road” initiative, a multi-trillion-dollar road, rail and infrastructure initiative impacting 60 countries, coupled with domestic growth in a nation of 1.3 billion, mean Chile’s copper is an increasingly solid bet for investors.

These include Chinese mining companies as well as other financiers from the mainland privy to the clean energy challenge their own country shares with Chile: namely, a lack of transmission lines, allowing power from solar and wind in interior provinces go unused rather than connecting with teeming cities like Beijing and Shanghai.

The U.S. is tied to Chile’s clean energy sector, too. In particular, the Colorado-based National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is collaborating with Chile’s National Commission on Energy to establish a renewable energy center as a clearinghouse of information, capacity building and finance expertise for the entire region.

Chile is a pioneer in a region leading a global transition to a low-carbon economy, with 53 percent of capacity from renewables versus a world average of 22 percent, reports the International Energy Agency (IEA). This is unsurprising: Polls have cited 80 percent of Latin Americans deeply concerned over climate change effects, including droughts, flooding, storms and glacier erosion.

And while the White House continues to defy such evidence – along with the international community, economic sense, and its own military – Chile’s mines and pioneering clean energy have a story to tell.

It’s worth a listen.

Joseph Kirschke is a Consultant for Energy Shift, an initiative accelerating clean energy use by mines which share electricity with local communities. Energy Shift is sponsored by RESOLVE, a leading Washington non-profit.