Search

President-elect Donald Trump is systematically stacking his cabinet with people who oppose the very organizations they're tasked to run. Are we living in an alternate universe? This group must have one heckuva secret lair. It's probably already being built under Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., with a secret passage planned from the White House War Room.

Here's a line-up of the key players and their superpowers. While they plan to undermine most of the rules, regulations and safety nets that ensure a just society, we should keep an eye out for the superhero who will come to our rescue.

Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson

This will be the ExxonMobil CEO's first foray into working for the government. Of course, as CEO of one of the world's largest oil conglomerates, he's had plenty of experience traveling in "geopolitically complex" regions, namely to negotiate oil field access. That could be useful!

According to former Exxon executive Ali Khedry, as quoted in the Atlantic, “He’s going to go from running a $400 billion semi-sovereign — practically speaking — corporation to a $66 billion, quite dysfunctional, quite under-resourced bureaucracy.”

In addition to the Middle East, “you have places like Russia, Qatar, across Europe, across Asia, across Central and South America. Exxon has done business in all of those places, and I think that’s what [Trump]’s hoping the secretary of state will do,” Khedery said. Trump, he added in an email, “wants his cabinet to do deals around the world to advance American interests in what is shaping up to be a neo-mercantilist model.”

Superpowers: Warming the planet to dangerous levels with the click of a signature pen.

Department of Energy nominee Rick Perry

If confirmed, the former governor of Texas will oversee the organization responsible for the safety of the nation's nuclear material, nuclear reactor production for the United States Navy, energy conservation, energy-related research, radioactive waste disposal, and domestic energy production.

The DOE also sponsors more research in the physical sciences than any other U.S. federal agency. Since Perry has no experience whatsoever with nukes, his nomination is a bit of a head-scratcher.

Superpowers: Able to flip-flop egregiously without looking the slightest bit embarrassed. At a 2011 debate, he called for three government agencies to be eliminated: the departments of Education and Commerce, but he blanked on the third, eventually stating, "I can’t. The third one, I can’t. Sorry. Oops." It turned out to be the DOE. Oops indeed.

Environmental Protection Agency nominee Scott Pruitt

Oklahoma's attorney general made action against the EPA his life's work and spent much of his career suing the agency. On LinkedIn, he even boasts of being “a leading advocate against the EPA’s activist agenda."

While the agency's environmental and climate scientists nervously await their fate, Christine Whitman, head of the EPA under George W. Bush, had this to say to Grist: “I don’t recall ever having seen an appointment of someone who is so disdainful of the agency and the science behind what the agency does. ... It doesn’t put us in a good place, in my mind. And he’s going to have trouble within the agency if he does convey that kind of disdain to the career staff.”

Superpowers: LinkedIn profile writing; willful climate skepticism despite evidence in his own backyard.

Treasury Department Secretary nominee Steven Mnuchin

Mnuchin started his career at Goldman Sachs but left to create his own hedge fund. He then formed a bank called OneWest to buy the remains of IndyMac, a failed subprime lender, and Financial Freedom, a reverse mortgage lender.

Financial Freedom gained infamy for foreclosing on more than 16,000 reverse mortgages, almost 40 percent of all government-guaranteed reverse mortgage foreclosures, and more than twice what should be typical for a lender of this size. "Financial Freedom is the absolute worst," Sandy Jolley told CNN. She's a financial counselor who works with families who are fighting foreclosure.

Mnuchin's relevant experience seems to be his role as national finance chairman for Mr. Trump’s campaign. As a pick to head the Department of Treasury, Mnuchin will be responsible for overseeing the collection of taxes, duties, and money paid to and due to the U.S.; paying all bills of the U.S.; managing the federal finances; producing all currency; and supervising national banks! Fox guarding the hen house?

Superpowers: Picking winners! Mnuchin bankrolled the "X-Men" franchise and "Avatar," and was an early supporter of Trump for president.

Health and Human Services Secretary nominee Tom Price

Among Trump's picks, Price has the most experience working in the government sector. He's a six-term congressman from Georgia who can't wait to repeal Obamacare. He's also got his eyes set on radical changes to Medicare and MediCal, crucial and beloved health programs for seniors and low-income Americans respectively.

Superpowers: Experience in government; able to cut medical access for 120 million Americans in a single bound.

Education Secretary nominee Betsy DeVos

Betsy DeVos is chair of the Michigan Republican party; heir to the Amway fortune (through her husband); sister to Erik Price, founder Blackwater Horizon (the private military company whose employees were found guilty of killing civilian Iraqis in 2007); and is largely credited with dismantling Michigan's public school system, despite lacking professional or academic experience in pedagogy of any kind.

In 2014, the Detroit Free Press found that two-thirds of charter schools were run by private corporations and face little to no monitoring.  An editor at the Free Press, Stephen Henderson, recently wrote: “This deeply dysfunctional education landscape — where failure is rewarded with opportunities for expansion and ‘choice’ means the opposite for tens of thousands of children — is no accident. It was created by an ideological lobby that has zealously championed free-market education reform for decades, with little regard for the outcome.”

DeVos will be responsible for policies related to federal education funding, distribution of the department's $73 billion budget, funding and monitoring their use, and enforcing federal laws prohibiting discrimination in schools.

Superpowers: Using ideology and profound preference for the marketplace to limit educational opportunities for children of all races, colors, religions and creeds.

Department of Labor Secretary nominee Andrew Puzder

The CEO of the holding company that owns the Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr. burger chains would be the top U.S. watchdog for workplace safety in Trump’s administration. All told, CKE Restaurant Holdings has been investigated and fined for hundreds of workplace safety and wage violations.

Puzder is a fast-food executive who has been critical of minimum wage increases as, of course, they'll hurt his bottom line. He's also a loud supporter of expansionary immigration and “amnesty” for the undocumented, since they make great low-level employees.

The Department of Labor fosters, promotes and develops the welfare of the wage earners. It is supposed to  improve working conditions; advance opportunities for profitable employment; and assure work-related benefits and rights.

Superpowers: Pissing off both the left (for his critiques of minimum wage and obvious disregard for worker well being) and the alt-right (for his vocal support of amnesty for immigrants).

Housing and Urban Development Director nominee Ben Carson

A retired pediatric neurosurgeon and former presidential candidate, Carson ran on a platform of government cutbacks, which makes this an odd appointment. HUD funds affordable housing, including $1.2 billion per year to the city of New York, where over 400,000 people rely on affordable housing funded through HUD.

The New York Times had this to say about his appointment: "With no experience in government or running a large bureaucracy, Mr. Carson, 65, publicly waffled over whether to join the administration [before taking this role.] He will oversee an agency with a $47 billion budget, bringing to the job a philosophical opposition to government programs that encourage what he calls 'dependency' and engage in 'social engineering.'”

Superpowers: This guy was a legit superhero of a pediatric neurosurgeon. He performed the only successful separation of Siamese twins joined at the back of the head, and pioneered the first successful neurosurgical procedure on a fetus inside the womb. If only he stuck to his strengths.

 

We should also mention that these guys are all super rich. They've got over $9.5 billion in combined weath, more than the 43 million least wealthy American households combined! Now wealth doesn't necessarily mean villian status, but it does mean being out of touch with the needs of the average American -- and the superpowers above prove it. This is a collection of villains fit for a Marvel franchise, don't you think? Maybe we can get Steven Mnuchin to option the movie rights.

Image credit: Robert Ball, Flickr

Editor's Note: This post originally appeared on Medium. Republished with permission.

By Tom Steyer

Though much about Donald Trump is chaotic and unpredictable, his overall agenda as a businessman and politician is clear and consistent: He wants to make himself more powerful, and he doesn’t care how he does it.

As a businessman, Trump preyed on the hopes and anxieties of struggling middle-class families. He cheated and scammed employees and customers alike. He left behind a trail of bankrupted companies. Past is prologue, and Trump has continued to pursue his own aggrandizement ruthlessly and relentlessly as a candidate and as president-elect.

In 2006, he rooted for the housing market collapse because, though it devastated millions of Americans, it allowed him to buy cheap property. He repeatedly stiffed contractors, plumbers, painters and other workers. He ran a fraudulent “university” to swindle hard-working Americans out of their savings. When he paid $25 million to settle scam-related lawsuits, he bragged that it was a good deal given the possibility of a far larger judgment. Through his behavior, he made it clear that his only goal was more money, more attention and more power for himself.

This hasn’t changed in the weeks since the election. His children, who will run his businesses, attend meetings with world leaders, making a mockery of the sham “blind trust” arrangement. After a conversation with Argentina’s president, reports suggested that a long-delayed Trump project in Argentina would move forward. Trump has positioned his Washington hotel as a destination for visiting dignitaries, giving foreign governments the opportunity to pay the president while seeking favors  —  one of several Trump conflicts that could violate the United States Constitution.

As president, Trump’s economic proposals will bend our very economy and tax system to his purposes. His approach is strikingly familiar: He isn’t worried about hurting American families.

The billionaire who refused to pay his workers says that the wages of American workers are “too high.” Yet lower wages mean more poverty, a weaker economy and shrinking prosperity. That’s why higher minimum wages are a wildly popular idea, even with Republican voters. But not with those, like Trump, who rig the economic system to favor themselves.

While advocating pay cuts for workers, Trump has proposed tax cuts for the super wealthy. Because Trump broke with decades of bipartisan precedent by refusing to release his tax returns, we cannot know precisely how much he would profit from these, but he said he didn’t pay taxes for years because he was “smart.” If he thinks that “smart” means being entirely focused on his own interests and jimmying the rules, why would we expect him to change?

During the campaign, Trump feigned sympathy for working families while peddling the false promise of a return to the old days of a vibrant American manufacturing sector fueled by coal and other fossil fuels.

This promise was never serious and will quickly hit an insurmountable roadblock: technology. In the 21st century, our country and our economy will run on computers and automation. Increasingly, it will run on clean energy, not fossil fuels. The idea that he can restore the economy of the 1950s was always a false promise  —  another Trump University, Trump Steaks or Trump Vodka.

In any case, reverting to a dirty, fossil fuel-based system would hurt business. It would increase costs, pollute our air and water, and negatively impact the health of American families. (Not to mention the immense human and economic costs of global warming caused by burning more fossil fuels.) It would also kill one of the strongest and fastest-growing job creators in the country: clean energy.

But Trump wants to recut the pie, not grow it. If the pie is shrinking, he can pit us against each other, sow discord, and keep us too busy fighting each other to notice his lack of ideas.

As one who spent 30 years in business, I know Trump’s selfish, divisive agenda is the exact opposite of what we need. Trump’s proposals will lead to stagnation, at best. A breakdown in international economic cooperation, which he threatens, could lead to much worse.

What we need  —  instead of Trump’s rigged rules for the wealthy   — are higher wages for workers and new rules to increase economic fairness at a time of historic shift. The problem isn’t just jobs going to other countries; it’s the hollowing-out of good-paying, middle-class jobs by technology. The tech-driven economy leads to a two-tier job market where workers are either critical or “commodity.” This divisive “winner-take-all” mentality hurts most Americans and worsens economic inequality.

That’s the biggest issue today, and the answer is clear: a sustainable economy powered by clean energy, and an economy where the rules work for the many rather than the few.

Tom Steyer is a philanthropist and the founder of NextGen Climate.

Editor's Note: A version of this post originally appeared on the Huffington Post.

By Bob Keefe

If they care about creating jobs, driving economic growth and saving consumers’ money, here’s one industry our elected officials in Washington and beyond should support: energy efficiency.

Nearly 1.9 million Americans now work in energy efficiency in America. A new analysis (read it here) by business group E2 (Environmental Entrepreneurs) and energy-efficiency group E4TheFuture yields some surprising details about the size and breadth of that workforce.

Employment in energy efficiency is bigger than solar, wind or other clean-energy fields. It’s bigger than sectors like real estate and food manufacturing. Energy-efficiency companies now employ about 10 times as many Americans as the oil and gas extraction business and nearly 30 times more Americans than the coal mining industry.

These jobs include cutting-edge careers creating and installing high-efficiency lighting and advanced building materials and insulation. They also include nuts-and-bolts jobs making Energy Star appliances and installing heating and air conditioning systems that also reduce heating and cooling bills in our homes, offices and schools.

In fact, HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) companies that are a staple of every city and community in America employ about 629,000 workers who spent at least a portion of their time working on energy-efficiency systems, according to the analysis. That makes HVAC companies the biggest sector for workers in energy-efficiency-related jobs.

Efficient lighting companies employ about 327,500 Americans, while about 292,000 Americans work in advanced materials and insulation jobs.

And those Energy Star appliances we all have or want in our kitchens? About 162,000 Americans go to work each and every day in factories and businesses across the country to make them and get them to market.

Energy Efficiency Jobs America is based on a detailed analysis of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data and responses from more than 20,000 U.S. companies surveyed in late 2015 by researcher BW Research Partnership.

While helping to quantify the burgeoning energy efficiency industry in America for the first time at this level, the analysis also reveals something else: Smart energy-efficiency policies create jobs.

Three of the top four states for energy-efficiency jobs also have the most forward-thinking efficiency policies in the country.

California, which is tied for No. 1 in energy-efficiency policies by the American Council for an Energy-Efficiency Economy (ACEEE), is home to 321,000 workers in energy-efficiency-related jobs  —  more than any other state.

Massachusetts, which ties California for good efficiency policies, is No. 4 in the country in energy-efficiency jobs with almost 90,000 workers. That’s despite Massachusetts’ relatively small size.

And Illinois, one of the few states to earn a perfect score for energy-efficient building codes by ACEEE, is No. 3 for energy-efficiency jobs with 89,800 workers.

Other states, including Florida, Texas and Georgia, also rank in the Top 10 for energy-efficiency jobs, but mainly because of their size and the fact that their hot summers demand more HVAC workers.
For the most part, though, the only thing stopping any states from creating more energy-efficiency jobs is inaction by their elected officials to pass smart energy policies.

Here are three areas where they can start:

• State and local governments could strengthen building codes to encourage more energy efficiency and the jobs that come with it  —  something Illinois does well.
• State utility commissions could encourage utilities to start or expand conservation and energy-efficiency programs for consumers and businesses. That’s something California, Massachusetts and other states do.
• States could prioritize energy efficiency in developing and/or strengthening their clean-energy standards, something Massachusetts does.

But what about action on a bigger scale that will benefit our entire country with more jobs and lower energy bills?

That’s where the federal government comes in.

It was great when President-elect Donald Trump recently pushed to save jobs at a Carrier air conditioner plant in Indiana, in part by guaranteeing corporate tax breaks.

But imagine how many energy-related jobs we could create if we took action to encourage energy efficiency at a national level.

Upholding important policies like the Paris climate agreement and the federal Clean Power Plan, for starters, would encourage utilities and big businesses alike to invest in technologies that save energy and protect their bottom lines. After all, the best way to reduce energy costs is to buy less energy.

And simply seeing energy-efficiency policies for what they can do  —  create jobs, save money and drive economic growth  —  would be a simple but commonsense step in the right direction for the Trump administration and Congress.

Let’s hope our new leadership in Washington and beyond recognize the importance of the energy-efficiency industry and the policies that supports it.

About 1.9 million American workers  —  and anybody who pays a power bill  —  are depending on them.

Image courtesy of E2

Featured Image: Flickr/Scott Ableman

Bob Keefe is the executive director of E2 (Environmental Entrepreneurs). Follow him on Twitter at @bkeefee2.

By Reed Bundy

While running corporate philanthropy at a public company, I received thousands of emails and letters requesting sponsorships for various nonprofit events. The majority of inquiring organizations approached corporate philanthropy the same way as 30 years ago: Sponsor our event, buy a table, give us a copy of your logo to display.  But amidst an exploding and socially-engaged workforce, the charity gala is quickly becoming a relic of traditional philanthropy -- falling short in driving real, sustained engagement with donors.

The charity gala was the hallmark of traditional checkbook philanthropy for decades, and the majority of these events follow the same formula: Hold the event in a hotel or convention space with an hour of cocktails followed by a chicken dinner, a video and/or speaker to heighten emotions, and then an hour (or more) of the dreaded, drawn-out live auction with the local celebrity.  

For many organizations, this formula works well, at least as a once-a-year fundraising boost that caters to the largest donors in the room.  Yet, when talking to so many of these organizations, I am often asked how they can stimulate repeat, year-round and multi-year engagement with donors.

Employee engagement is supplanting the charity gala

Parallel to the endless slate of charity galas, employee engagement has emerged as central to the successful modern corporate responsibility program.  

The days of simply writing a large check to meet a corporate responsibility quota have long since passed, with millennials insisting that their employers have programs that enable genuine, sustained engagement within the community.  To that end, nonprofits need to build relationships with corporations that go well beyond a few well-placed logos at the annual event.  For an increasing number of corporate philanthropy managers who are asked to sponsor an event, the primary filtering mechanism is now to ask the question: “How can our employees get involved?”  

At a gala, corporate tables are often filled with executives and last-minute additions who otherwise have no direct connection to the organization.  But an event that incorporates and engages a critical mass of employees through volunteerism, pro-bono service, personal interaction and a little bit of fun can help create the next generation of millennial supporters and, more importantly, advocates.

For corporate responsibility professionals who ultimately need to convince the executive team or board of certain social investments, the argument to increase funding is far more convincing if they can point to an army of happy employees who have a personal connection to a specific organization.  Recruiting and retaining top talent is one of the most essential strategic investments of most growing companies, so integrating a corporate responsibility strategy into the employee benefit program is absolutely aligned with most businesses’ priorities.

Nonprofits that want to secure lasting, meaningful relationships with corporations need to embrace the reality that the old model of corporate philanthropy no longer appeals to most growing companies.  

Rather than eliminate galas entirely, fundraising professionals should consider supplementary events and engagements that can draw in younger supporters who may be more inclined to become ambassadors for a new class of repeat donors.  

One executive director of a local nonprofit that supports at-risk youth once told me that she’ll never hold a formal gala, instead opting for smaller, more intimate events where attendees can engage directly with the organization’s young beneficiaries.  It was at one of these smaller events that I not only reaffirmed my company’s support for the organization, but also opened up my own wallet to become a personal supporter.

The next generation of donors does not want to sit through a plated dinner in order to demonstrate their commitment to an organization.  They want to get their hands dirty, get to know the people they are helping, and make a personal connection with that organization (and then, of course, share their activity all over social media).  Organizations looking to drive sustained relationships with donors need to recognize that the new corporate philanthropy is driven by engagement first, not checkbooks.  

The patient nonprofit executive director will be rewarded when he or she looks at corporate philanthropy through the lens of employees, putting employee engagement ahead of monetary donations.  Putting employee engagement first will open up new and sustained avenues for donations, drive more meaningful corporate relationships, and perhaps even spare us from one more serving of chicken at the next charity gala.

Image credit: Pexels

Reed Bundy is the founder of Ethostrategies, where he helps companies build, implement and scale strategic corporate social responsibility programs. Reed has worked in the social impact space throughout his career, most recently running corporate social responsibility and internal communications for Constant Contact in Waltham, MA.

Los Angeles has a longstanding and critical relationship with the ocean -- most notably at the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, through which nearly 150 million tons of cargo travel each year. Now, the port of Los Angeles will host a new avenue for promoting ocean-related business that will help keep the planet sustainable.

AltaSea at the Port of Los Angeles is a new ocean collaborative with a vision of “an ocean that will sustain future generations.”

AltaSea occupies a 35-acre site within the boundaries of San Pedro on the northern edge of the port of Los Angeles. The first phase of development consists of four former cargo warehouses with 120,000 feet of space, including dock space for research vessels and plans for an education pavilion.

AltaSea imagines itself as “a place where innovators collaborate to develop solutions critical to the survival of the earth and its inhabitants.”

The new multi-tenant nonprofit will operate at the intersection of business, education and science. And it bases its vision on five major pillars:

• Economic opportunities for future generations must be created.


• The ocean must be explored.


• Future generations must be fed.


• Future generations must have clean energy.


• Future challenges must be met.

The new facility provides a place for innovators, educators and scientists to come together, with AltaSea as the convener, doing its work without duplicating the efforts of others.

Sharing infrastructure will help foster collaboration

In an interview in the Planning Report, Dr. Sandra Whitehouse, AltaSea’s chief scientific officer, said the organization does more than facilitate collaboration among other entities.

“We also look for what kind of infrastructure is necessary for some of these entities that we can encourage them to share,” Whitehouse said. “Our belief is that sharing critical infrastructure — like tanks and testing facilities — will also help foster collaboration.”

This strategy has not gone unnoticed. In addition to praise by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, AltaSea was singled out in a report commissioned by the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce as “a major economic driver for revitalization of the LA Waterfront.” The study found that AltaSea will “add more than 700 jobs and could create a green industry ‘cluster’ that will draw other new jobs and office development.”

Those jobs will come through the development of industry clusters, and the first two are sustainable aquaculture and blue technology.

Whitehouse said she is excited that Catalina Sea Ranch is the initial aquaculture anchor tenant. The company is the first aquaculture facility to obtain a permit to grow mussels, clams and oysters in federal waters. “Mussels are inherently sustainable,” she explained. “They don’t require external feed. They don’t’ require antibiotics; they actually filter feed, so they clean the water while they’re growing.”

The Blue Technology cluster will focus primarily on underwater robotics. It also recognizes the rapidly growing field of underwater autonomous vehicles (AUVs) that travel the ocean loaded with sensors and cameras, gathering data that help scientists understand the chemical, physical and biological status of the ocean.

“There are many types of underwater robots,” Whitehouse said. “[These range] from small, two-foot-long underwater robots that take images of rockfish, to the Wave Glider -- which is about the size of a surfboard and goes up and down in the top 300 feet of the ocean, measuring parameters such as temperature and pH.”

Better known as an aircraft manufacturer, Boeing has developed a 30-foot AUV, the Echo Voyager, that can venture under Arctic ice and also explore deep ocean trenches.  Boeing and AltaSea are in partnership discussions, and AltaSea hopes to execute an agreement with Boeing in early 2017

AltaSea emphasizes research but doesn’t ignore education: It attracted a world-class tenant to help promote STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) and public education about the ocean.

Ocean explorer Bob Ballard, known by many as the person who discovered the Titanic, has agreed to be the education anchor tenant and made AltaSea the home base for his vessel, the Nautilus.

Fifty percent of the United States lies beneath the sea

Dr. Ballard grew up in Southern California and attended the University of California in both Los Angeles and Santa Barbara. “I owe a lot to California; I owe a lot to the educational system,” he told the Planning Report.

Ballard said he is basing at AltaSea because “the largest ocean on the planet is the Pacific Ocean. It covers a third of Earth. And in that ocean is most of America. Fifty percent of the United States lies beneath the sea. And the vast majority of that 50 percent is in the Pacific Ocean. We have better maps of Mars than half of the United States of America.”

Even given the importance of the anchor tenants, many more organizations have either agreed to partner with AltaSea or are on the recruitment list. They include the Aquarium of the Pacific, USC, CalTech and the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium.

But having a long-term lease for a 35-acre waterfront property doesn’t make a world-class organization. In this first phase, the existing warehouses will be restored for the scientific, business and education communities to connect and collaborate. In addition, one warehouse will be upgraded and become the future home of the Southern California Marine Institute.

An education pavilion will have outside amphitheater seating facing the ocean and will be used for lectures, demonstrations and exhibitions. An indoor classroom and a coffee or snack bar will also be included.

Gensler, a noted architectural firm, designed the AltaSea facility which will be built over the next 20 years.  Architectural Digest was so impressed with the plans that they were included in an August 2016 Architectural Digest story “These 9 Buildings Will Soon Change the Los Angeles Skyline.”

AltaSea intends to nurture both new and established companies that can take advantage of the facility’s access to the deep ocean to “produce innovative ocean- and technology-related products, services and jobs in Los Angeles.”

The vision is for a marine “Silicon Valley,” producing everything from ocean robotics and aquaculture to algae-based fuels and wave energy.

The Research and Business Hub also hopes to serve as an “ocean-inspired think tank” where collaborations can produce “nature-inspired technologies that will sustainably provide for basic human needs such as food and energy.”

The "blue economy" valued at an estimated $1.3 trillion

A Nov. 18 story in The Hill focused on the concept that the ocean and the “blue economy” could help find a win between the environment and traditional economics.

“Economic activity in the ocean is certainly growing rapidly — currently estimated at over $1.3 trillion in gross value by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a number they expect to grow faster than the global economy over the next decade,” wrote John Virdin and Pawan Patil of The Hill.

Dr. Whitehouse said the blue economy concept includes the need to value ocean health as the underpinning of much of the economic activity in the ocean.

AltaSea appears to be right on the mark in understanding this vision of a blue economy. Organizations wishing to locate at or collaborate with AltaSea should contact Shawn Jensen, the manager of government funding and program partnerships, through the AltaSea Business Hub section of its web site.

Images courtesy of AltSea

Those cheap jeans at H&M and the discount skirts at Forever 21 come at a very high cost to the environment. A report by Greenpeace Germany released before Black Friday, that infamous shopping day where consumers descend on stores in droves looking for deals, looks at the environmental cost of fast fashion.

The fast fashion industry is expanding rapidly. From 2000 to 2014, clothing production doubled, and sales rose from $1 trillion in 2002 to $1.8 trillion in 2015. They're forecast to hit $2.1 trillion by 2025. The average consumer now buys 60 percent more clothing items a year and keeps them for about half as long as 15 years ago. What that means is a huge volume of textile waste.

The environmental impacts of fast fashion range from chemicals used to produce textiles, which can pollute rivers and oceans, to high levels of both pesticide and energy use.

One of the biggest environmental costs associated with fast fashion comes from the use of synthetic fibers, which is rapidly increasing. Take polyester, which emits almost three times more carbon dioxide in its lifecycle than cotton.

Polyester is present in 60 percent of today’s clothing, and it can take decades to degrade. About 21.3 million tons of polyester was used in clothing this year, a 157 percent increase from 2000. Fossil fuels are needed to produce polyester, and the material's carbon footprint is almost three times that of cotton.

Since the 1980s, fashion retailers have been increasing the turnaround of fashion trends, which in turn increases the rate consumers throw away clothes. The life cycles of consumer products shortened by 50 percent from 1992 to 2002. But the current fast fashion phenomenon really began at the beginning of this century. Brands like Zara and H&M have seen what Greenpeace terms an “explosive expansion” since 2000 to become the biggest clothes retailers on the planet. And the fast fashion brands like these promote “leads to increased consumption of all clothes, including budget and basic items,” according to the report.

Solutions to the environmental problems of fast fashion

The hazardous chemicals used in textile production present a problem. Greenpeace began its Detox My Fashion campaign in 2011, and 78 companies have supported it since then -- including fashion brands, large retailers and textile suppliers. The goal of the campaign is to achieve both greater transparency and zero discharges of hazardous chemicals in the supporting companies supply chain manufacturing by 2020. Greenpeace found that three companies which support the campaign are on track to meet their commitments: H&M, Benetton and Inditex.

A McKinsey report released earlier this fall lists steps that both consumers and companies can take to make fast fashion more sustainable:

• Develop standards and practices for designing clothing items that can be easily reused or recycled.


• Invest in developing new fibers that will lower the environmental impact of making textiles.


• Encourage consumers to care for their clothes in ways that will prolong their use such as washing them in cold water.

Clothing made by fast fashion companies is not designed to last very long. When consumers dispose of their unwanted clothes into the garbage, they almost always wind up in landfills. As much as 95 percent of the clothes that are thrown away can be either re-worn, reused or recycled. But Greenpeace points out that closing the loop by recycling the fibers into virgin material to make new textiles is needed.

The group said consumers must also slow down their rate of buying clothes by “focusing on the clothes that are needed and re-thinking the systems used to supply them, taking in all stages from their design to their re-use or recycling."

Creating a circular economy for fast fashion “is a fundamental component to a more sustainable industry,” Tamsin Lejeune, founder of the Ethical Fashion Forum (EFF) and CEO of Mysource, wrote in a blog post. But it only treats the “symptoms of the problem,” such as waste, and not the source. And that is “our addiction to buying and selling vast quantities of low cost products.” 

To address that problem, consumers need to be wiser in their purchases and companies need to re-think the strategy of turning out as many clothing items as they can.

Image credit: Flickr/Elvert Barnes

By Scott Huntington

The Great Barrier Reef is the world’s largest living structure. It’s about the same size as Germany or Japan and is so expansive that it can be seen from outer space. It contains 3,000 individual reefs comprising 600 types of coral. A vast range of fish, shark, ray, whale, dolphin and mollusk species call it home.

The Great Barrier Reef is one of the most beautiful, impressive and diverse natural areas on the planet. Recently, however, changes in the environment have been killing off coral and threatening this natural wonder.

What’s happening to the world’s reefs?

Recent diver surveys off the coast of Australia discovered that up to half the Great Barrier Reef was dead due to coral bleaching, a response to warm ocean water that causes the coral to eject the algae that live inside of it and give the coral most of its food and its color. If the temperature returns to normal, the coral can recover. If that doesn’t happen, however, the organism will die.

Scientists forecast that the warming will continue causing more reefs to bleach and potentially die off. If that happens, we could see a greater number of reefs being threatened by bleaching than ever before.

Why is it happening?

El Niño and climate change are two likely causes of this coral bleaching because they both cause ocean temperatures to rise. The increased level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels is also affecting the reef. As carbon levels increase, more of the gas dissolves in the ocean. This lowers the water’s pH, making it more difficult for the reef to develop — and recover from bleaching and other damage.

Pollution, overfishing, coastline industrialization and reckless tourism may also be causing damage.

What’s being done to stop it?

The Australian government said it will spend $965.3 million ($1.3 billion AUD) over the next five years on the health of the Great Barrier Reef. Australia will increase the frequency with which it surveys the ecosystem as part of its response and has set goals to reduce nitrogen pollution by 80 percent and sediment loads by half.

The site was almost placed on the United Nations' “in danger” list, but officials decided against the move. The Australian government is now scrambling to make sure it stays that way.

Many activists say the government still isn’t doing enough to protect the reef. One major criticism is that the government is not focusing enough on emissions from coal, which impact climate change and lead to coral reef damage. Environmental organizations, celebrities, conservationists and ordinary citizens are urging officials to do more and encouraging people to get involved by signing petitions and spreading awareness.

Is there hope?

A somewhat jokey obituary that circulated the Web recently mourned the death of the Great Barrier Reef, but scientists say it’s not dead yet. It is clearly in serious trouble, however. The Australian government must do what it can to improve water quality and reduce pollution, which will require changes in industry, regulations and lifestyle if it wants to save the reef.

Global warming also must be stopped if we are to save this one-of-a-kind World Heritage Site — a responsibility that lies with the whole planet. Improving water quality will help give the reef a fighting chance. But ultimately, if water temperatures don’t return to normal, the coral will remain in life-threatening danger.

The Great Barrier Reef is not dead yet, but you could say it’s on life support. Pollution, warming oceans and greenhouse gases have caused some serious damage to the ecosystem. It will take some substantial changes, but it is possible that the Great Barrier Reef will one day recover.

Image credit: Flickr/FarbenfroheWunderwelt

Scott Huntington is a writer and blogger. Follow him on Twitter @SMHuntington. 

By Anna Johnson 

Tourism is a vital component of a healthy economic system. Global international tourism revenue is worth more than $7.7 trillion, and it’s the foundation for businesses around the world.

But tourism can have a nasty effect on the environment. Transportation is one of the largest contributors to air pollution, and tourists unknowingly endanger the environment with their excursions. Water resource depletion, land degradation, pollution, waste, sewage, construction, deforestation, and alteration of ecosystems are all direct results of worldwide tourism.

Thankfully, some organizations realize just how debilitating worldwide tourism can be, and they’ve made it a goal to reduce some of the destruction through something called the World Responsible Tourism Awards, held every year at the World Travel Market.

"The future of tourism"

The award, which is in its 12th year, is given to tourist-based organizations that go above and beyond to ensure their travel arrangements are economical, reduce their impact on the environment and improve the economy.

This year, 13 finalists were considered for five categories, and one overall winner was selected. The judges narrowed the overall winner down to two organizations: Lemon Tree Hotels and Tren Ecuador. The founder of the award, Justin Francis, felt these two companies far outstripped their competitors in responsible tourism.

“When I founded these awards in 2004, it was the aim to highlight what is possible to achieve through responsible tourism and hold the winners up as examples to be replicated by the wider tourism industry,” Francis said in the official World Travel Market press release.

“Lemon Tree Hotels [and] Tren Ecuador show clearly how big corporations can adopt responsible tourism as a core part of their business, be commercially successful and deliver significant benefits for local communities. These businesses move a more responsible style of tourism into the mainstream. They are the future of tourism.”

Lemon Tree Hotels’ employment efforts

Lemon Tree Hotels is an Indian hotel chain. It’s the third largest group in India and has recently become the fastest-growing hospitality company there.

Aside from winning the World Responsible Tourism award, Lemon Tree also took home the Best Accommodation for Responsible Employment award, thanks to its efforts to offer employment primarily to workers who have faced significant challenges in finding meaningful employment.

Thousands of citizens are struggling to find jobs in India, so the company’s efforts have helped to alleviate that pressure. Professor Harold Goodwin, chair of the judges, was particularly impressed with Lemon Tree Hotels’ efforts to improve the economic and environmental impacts of tourism in its hotels.

“Lemon Tree Hotels are recognized for tackling, effectively, a major social problem in so many societies,” he said in a statement. “A large corporate business backed by international investors successfully getting disabled and other opportunity-deprived people into the workforce in tourism and making this a core part of their operations is a powerful statement.”

Tren Ecuador improves tourism relations

The other winner, Tren Ecuador, is a South American train company. This firm also garnered the award for Best Poverty Reduction and Inclusion. Tren caught the attention of the judges, thanks to its efforts to open up train availability beyond just the elite.

Rather than depend on the traditional travel pattern in which guests remain isolated from businesses and tourist stops along its routes, Tren Ecuador created a system of shared value with local enterprises. Since its efforts began, the company has created 5,000 livelihoods for locals in communities situated near the rail lines.

“The judges hold Tren Ecuador up as an outstanding, holistic example of how all tours should be designed, and feel that if all tourism was planned in this way it would be very effective at making better places in which to live, as well as better places to visit,” said Professor Goodwin.

How you can travel with the environment in mind

As Francis stated in his press release, we’re looking at the future of tourism. Such efforts as these have the power to create a snowball effect for both organizations and tourists.

Corporations like Lemon Tree Hotels and Tren Ecuador have set high standards for responsible tourism to encourage greater participation in environmental and economical tourism around the world. Anyone interested in raising support for this style of travel can do things to be more responsible in the tourism industry.

• Recognize your personal impact: Achieving this quality of travel means recognizing every step you take can have an impact on the environment somehow. As you travel, look for transportation modes that involve the least amount of emissions. Choose hotels that embrace eco-friendly operations. Book excursions that support the environment, such as whale watching. It may take a little more creativity and planning, but it greatly reduces the overall impact.

• Support local tourism: Become aware of where your money goes when you travel. It’s easy to hit up McDonalds and Walmart for breakfast or articles you may have forgotten; but in doing so, you neglect the local market. It might be a little more costly to purchase food, souvenirs, and products from local vendors, but you will benefit the local economy significantly.

• Pay attention to cultural differences: Waltzing into a new country without regard to rules, form, or function is one of the worst things we can do. It’s the antithesis of responsible tourism. Instead of acting the same way you would at home, try to be sensitive to the cultural norms. Ask before you take photos, learn the local greeting customs, and do your research on what might offend those you visit.

Responsible tourism is catching. If both individuals and travel organizations put a stronger emphasis on this style of vacationing, we have the potential to change our environmental and economic impact all over the world.

Image credit: Pexels

Anna is a freelance writer, researcher, and business consultant from Olympia, WA. A columnist for Entrepreneur.com, HuffingtonPost.com and more, Anna specializes in entrepreneurship, technology, and social media trends. Follow her on Twitter and LinkedIn.

“Over the past five years, the agency has helped more than 2,500 small charities to increase their communications capabilities.” 

Well, not in those exact words, but the message was clear.

With five weeks to go before Donald Trump is scheduled to take the oath of office, the transition has certainly played out as a 21st-century version of "Alice in Wonderland." This week the 45th president appointed Rick Perry to head the Department of Energy, one of the cabinet-level agencies the former Texas governor famously forgot that he wanted to abolish during his short-lived 2012 presidential campaign.

The appointment came a week after Trump's transition team sent a list of 70-plus questions to the DOE, including a request for the names of employees and contractors who worked on climate change-related projects.

But the department politely declined the request on Tuesday, essentially telling Trump and company to stuff it.

DOE officials responded by insisting that the department would “respect the professional and scientific integrity and independence” of all employees working within its offices and labs, the Washington Post reported. In short: While all public information would be readily made available to the transition team, the DOE put the kibosh on naming individuals.

The fear is not that employees will be fired from their jobs; the patchwork of union membership and other employment protections, for better or worse, will prevent any melodrama of mass firings. But DOE employees could be reassigned, or even see their work become ignored or marginalized by the political appointees that Trump and Perry would enlist to run the department over the next four years. Contractors with long-term relationships with the DOE and its employees could also be terminated or find that their contracts will not be renewed.

Meanwhile, the Post's Joe Davidson described a scene at some DOE labs as akin to the time when dot-coms were folding during that sector’s market crash at the turn of the century. Scientists have reportedly been downloading their research and scientific data onto independent servers in the anticipation that such information will eventually be suppressed or disappear during a Trump administration.

Add the recent announcement that ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson will be the next Secretary of State, and U.S. energy policy could undergo a massive shift despite the energy and climate change mitigation policies that are being adopted by much of the world.

Trump’s signal that the U.S. will boost its consumption of oil and coal comes at a time when market forces have caused natural gas and renewables to displace coal (and, in the long run, possibly oil) as the foundation of the country’s energy portfolio. Trump has made the dubious promise that coal jobs will come back to America. But the fact is that job opportunities in the clean-energy sector are increasing at a rapid rate – and, as Bloomberg reported in May, have surpassed employment in oil and gas drilling.

Fears of a total wipe-out of the policies made over the past eight years (and even under George W. Bush) are probably overstated. A total reversal of a previous administration’s policies is unheard of, as evident in the grumblings the Left often directed at the Obama administration on everything from Guantanamo Bay to government secrecy.

Meanwhile, the falling price of renewables such as solar and wind power have made them cost competitive with fossil fuels, and the private sector has responded in kind.

And finally, a change in the federal government will have little impact on states and municipalities that have embarked on their own clean-energy investment plans.

Nevertheless, Trump’s appointments indicate that anyone in the science community will need to fasten their seat belts and add a straightjacket with lots of bubble tape, as they'll be in for one heck of a bumpy ride.

Image credit: Walmart/Flickr