Search

By Dan Stonington

This year marks the centennial celebration of what some have called "America’s greatest idea" -- the National Parks system. Indeed, for those of us lucky enough to have visited one -- or to live close to many, as we do in the Pacific Northwest -- it’s easy to see the truth in this title. The Parks embody a spirit of wildness, beauty and vision that is quintessentially American.

As the country looks back at 100 years of National Parks and the successes and complexities that have come with them, it’s also a chance to look forward to the future. I work on forests, and offer these ideas for what the next century of conservation will include.

1. Humans as a positive, regenerative force on the landscape and each other

The history of our national parks and wilderness areas has been one of protecting places from ourselves. We’ve won critical conservation successes in the past 100 years, but there is no denying that humans have greatly diminished the natural capital assets of the planet. We have come to see the negative and damaging impact we can have on our surrounding environment.

In our work at the Northwest Natural Resource Group (NNRG), the organization for which I serve as Executive Director, we see this history in the beliefs of small family forest owners. Across the country, these landowners (defined as owning 10 to 1,000 acres) are responsible for stewarding more forest land than all the national forests and national parks combined. There’s a national survey that happens every five to eight years of these woodland owners, and it highlights a fascinating phenomenon – the majority of these landowners have conservation-oriented values, but are hesitant to get engaged in stewardship for a fear of damaging their woods.

At NNRG, we have the enjoyable job of beginning to address this fear by showing landowners how they can actually accelerate natural processes and be a positive force for restoration. It is a process of psychological transformation as we walk them through their options for managing their land. Many have opportunities to conduct commercial timber thinning projects – cutting trees! – in a way that is economically viable and also rebuilds the land’s natural capital. In coming decades, as markets for carbon, water quality, and other ‘ecosystem services’ mature, the financial incentives to help drive this transformation will only strengthen.

On the timber markets end of the ecological forestry equation is the revolutionary philosophy behind the Living Building Challenge (LBC) – that we can build buildings that actually replenish our natural capital and have a regenerative effect on our environment and communities. LBC requires the use of Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified wood, which makes sense given the parallel philosophy of FSC to manage forests for a balance of social, environmental, and economic gain. LBC is a sign of the century to come. It provides an opportunity for everyone, not just woodland owners, to begin to face our fear of taking action that might damage our environment and instead helps us understand that we humans can be a positive, restorative, regenerative force on our surroundings and each other.

2. Reconnected landscapes that bring nature to people, instead of just people traveling to parks

There’s an exciting effort making progress in Puget Sound cities – the Green Cities Partnership movement – which seeks to restore native Pacific Northwest conifer forests to urban parks and natural areas over the next decade. The flagship program, the Green Seattle Partnership, is aiming for no less than 2,500 acres restored, and is already half-way there.

NNRG has had the privilege of supporting the partnership by writing plans for the city of Seattle to accelerate the transition from hardwoods like alder and maple that currently fill city green spaces to forests dominated by our charismatic big-tree conifer species of fir, hemlock and cedar. Moving from the cities to the foothills next to Mt. Rainier National Park, these are the same restoration strategies that NNRG and many other partners are coaching small forest landowners to implement.

We each understand intuitively that trees and greenness are good. At the start of the next century of conservation, we are adding to that intuition a powerful body of research showing the huge return on investment of bringing nature back to cities. Over the next century, conservation will come in the form of urban greenery that cleans our stormwater and stores carbon; trail corridors that get us outside, and wind our commutes and weekends through Pollinator Pathways; and recovered access to shorelines and streams that renew our joyful sense of place.

Our descendants will be thankful that they live in 2116. It will be more than a century after we began to truly pursue the enormous health, equity, financial, and quality of life benefits of reconnecting our landscapes, and bringing nature back to the places where we live out our daily lives.

3. Restoration as a story of who we are

Around the time the National Parks Service was founded in 1916, Ellis Island was ushering a million immigrants per year into the country. The new National Parks, the bountiful plains, the plentiful western rivers to be used for power and irrigation, and the defense of our continent from threats abroad – these were a part of shaping our national narrative over the past century. But it was also a history of the displacement of First Nations, suburbanization fueled by burning carbon that we now know is posing an existential threat to the planet, and an economic system that has led us back around to the polarizing wealth disparities of 100 years ago.

Forest restoration is a messy concept because of climate change. We’re already recognizing that restoring plant and animal communities to conditions that existed when the National Parks were founded will be impossible in many places. But if we give the word broader meaning – one that embraces an openness to honestly face our past social, economic, and ecological injustices – then the stories that our descendants 100 years from now will tell about restoration, conservation, and who we are as a Pacific Northwest region and as a country begin to take shape.

 

Restoration and conservation are being woven into our story in new ways. The sooner we recognize this new narrative, the more it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy and serve as the story we pass along to future generations about who we are.

Image credit: Flickr/Phil

Dan Stonington is the Executive Director for Northwest Natural Resource Group.

Today, fewer people know their neighbors and often do not feel connected with their local communities. Bay Area startup NextDoor promised to become a game-changer in how people interact with each other in their own neighborhoods. After all, when more consumers have become less trusting of peer-review sites such as Angie’s List or completely creeped out by Craigslist, why not use technology to break down barriers where we live and avoid the annoying banter that consumes our Facebook feeds?

NextDoor was onto something, as it is now a popular means of communicating across at least 115,000 neighborhoods. The company estimates that thanks to its growth at least 65 percent of Americans now live in a neighborhood that has a NextDoor group. The site has proven to become a great tool for getting rid of unwanted stuff. It can also help that distraught owner find his lost pet, assist in locating a dependable babysitter, find a handyman or handywoman, and, of course, help keep an eye on crime.

On that last point, however, some NextDoor users became too vigilant and even assumed the worst about some of their neighbors. As the blog Fusion reported in March 2015, the site’s crime and safety postings were bogged down with what amounted to racial profiling. A typical posting would be a report of "suspicious characters" who turned out to just be people of color in hoodies. One incident, for example, came after one Oakland resident responded to a safety posting about "sketch characters checking out a house" to let his neighbors know they were, in fact, friends who showed up at the wrong house. The commenter responded with a brusque, "That's a relief."

Such comments sound innocent on the surface but in aggregate represent a persistent distrust upon the first sight of people of color who happen to be walking outside, a highly disturbing trend. When such assumptions go unchallenged in the environment of an online community forum, people of color quickly and rightly begin to feel unwelcome. And no one should be made to feel they need to be the PC police in a social setting.

There was no way additional comment moderation or community meetings could solve this problem. It was both widespread and insidious, and it represented a real problem for NextDoor. The company risked losing not only the feel-good atmosphere of neighborhood friendliness it desired, but with it its business.

Another challenge for NextDoor was that this issue sprung up in the midst of racial tensions that flared across the U.S. in recent years. NextDoor could amplify those tensions by doing nothing, or it could address them head-on and be a beacon of change.

NextDoor decided to take the latter route and did so by not only turning the orthodoxy of technological design on its head, but also taking plenty of time to get it right. So far, the company insists the outcome is a 75 percent reduction in racial profiling on its crime and public safety postings.

To learn more, TriplePundit spoke with Kelsey Grady, NextDoor’s head of communications, from her office in San Francisco.

“One of most important things to know is that we are not done with this process,” Grady told us. “We still have a lot of work that needs to be done, especially with our mobile application. But we’ve reduced these instances, and in the meantime have gotten a lot of great feedback from our users and peers at other companies.”

By October of last year, NextDoor realized that the level of racial profiling incidents left the company no choice but to make addressing this problem a priority. It did not matter to the company that the overwhelming majority of these posts were submitted by users who did not intend to incite stereotypical fears but were largely operating on unconscious bias. Even if these posts were not the result of some racist trolls purposely fanning the flames of hate, NextDoor decided a design change was needed.

To that end, as Wired explained this summer, NextDoor broke convention by going against the unwritten rule of minimizing the number of steps in the design of a technology product. It has been inculcated in us that when using a website or smartphone app the fewer steps between us and our purchases or our published comment, the better.

But speed and ease pose plenty of risks. Hence the nasty note we may get when we click on “haha” to react to a Facebook post when we meant to click “sad.” On that point, NextDoor went against convention and added steps to the process involved when users post entries related to crime and safety.

“We realized that it doesn’t matter how small the numbers are, the fact is that any racial profiling incident can have a hugely negative impact in any neighborhood,” Grady said. “Maybe we couldn’t exactly measure that posting’s impact, but as a tech company, we had to get past our conventional analytic testing as we had a moral obligation to get this right.”

The process evolved from January to August of this year, which is a million years in tech company time. The company simultaneously released six different iterations of the crime and safety posting process to different online neighborhood groups in order to figure out which process could best reduce racial profiling. One design feature offered no changes to the product’s interface, allowing it to serve as a control group. Meanwhile, moderators from NextDoor and its partner organizations manually combed through the site to flag postings that were clearly instances of racial profiling.

Throughout the product re-design, NextDoor partnered with community organizations in Oakland, California, including 100 Black Men and Neighbors for Racial Justice. Public officials in Oakland were also consulted for their expertise. In the end, the company and its stakeholder partners settled on a feature that eliminated the most occurrences of racial profiling.

One of the first steps for the company was to describe racial profiling clearly and succinctly for users. NextDoor defines racial profiling not so much by what is said, but by what is left out. The most frequent examples of racial profiling, in fact, were posts that lacked a complete description of an individual.

Simply put, “black male” or “white woman” is far from enough when it comes to gauging dodgy behavior in one’s neighborhood. “When you have a post that has only the race and gender in such a description, that is damaging to anyone who can be described by those terms,” Grady explained.

In addition to the requirement for more details of a person’s appearance, additional details related to their behaviors are also now required. “Let’s face it, it’s not criminal to make a U-turn,” Grady said. “Nor is it criminal to walk down the street.”

As users submit a crime and safety posting, they are asked questions that nudge them to look inward. Is what that person doing really suspicious, if race or ethnic background is taken out of the equation? Clothing must now be described from head to toe; after all, just about everyone under the age of 60 sports a hoodie from time to time, or even daily. The more detailed a description, the more helpful a resident could then be to neighbors and, in more dire cases, to law enforcement.

“With the new posting flow, it only makes sense to ask for more detail, as you can share better details with your neighbors, really motivate people to be on the lookout for truly suspicious behavior, and finally, if necessary, to share this information with police,” Grady continued.

There is no way any algorithm or design flow can weed out all racial profiling. So many of the assumptions we make based on someone’s race or ethnicity are due to the systemic racism and unconscious bias endemic in the U.S. No technology or company will be able to stamp out these assumptions 100 percent.

But what NextDoor accomplished puts other companies on notice that better design is a critical step in eliminating harmful assumptions. Good design can help us treat each other with more respect and empathy. And as Grady made clear, this is still an ongoing process for NextDoor, from which the company and its employees can continue to learn.

“We’re not done yet, as we’re still working with our partner organizations. And we’re still holding regular stakeholder calls so we can update each other on what’s going on,” Grady told us. “No one at this company was an expert at racial profiling, but what we were able to do is merge our software development team’s expertise with that of local community groups and city officials to arrive at a conclusion.”

Image credit: David Sawyer/Flickr; NextDoor, Screenshots 

More than 20 million Americans gained access to health insurance in the years since the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA, commonly known as Obamacare). While more Americans are insured now than ever before, many people receiving coverage under ACA may have only visited a doctor a few times in their lives. And, more importantly, some don’t know enough about wellness to ask the right questions and take the right steps to improve their health.

How can we educate newly-insured patients and help them advocate for their own health? And how can patient education help ensure greater access to healthcare translates into a real reduction in preventable illnesses? 3p spoke with Eileen Howard Boone, SVP of corporate social responsibility and philanthropy at CVS Health and president of the CVS Health Foundation, to answer these questions and find out how the company is working to educate patients.

TriplePundit: CVS Health takes an active role in improving access to healthcare in tandem with patient education. Can you give us a rundown of your 'Prescription for a Better World' to get things started?

Eileen Howard Boone: Our [corporate social responsibility (CSR)] strategy, “Prescription for a Better World,” ties directly to our company purpose of helping people on their path to better health. Even though millions of Americans are newly insured, we know there continue to be people who lack access to quality healthcare.

We are living in a time in which our aging population requires more services; we have a national epidemic of obesity; and diabetes and other chronic illnesses continue to stress our healthcare system. That’s why one of the key strategies of fulfilling our purpose is through bringing quality healthcare that is affordable and accessible to the communities that we serve.

3p: CVS Health continues to expand its MinuteClinic program, and you reported more than 5 million patient visits last year with 85 new locations added. Can you explain how resources like MinuteClinics can improve healthcare access and patient education in underserved populations?

EHB: By creating a healthcare delivery model that responds to patient demand, MinuteClinic makes access to low-cost, high-quality primary care easier for more Americans, including underserved populations.

MinuteClinic helps to fill the gap in the healthcare system by providing additional, affordable access for patients between visits to their primary care physician and keeping them away from unnecessary and costly emergency room visits. With most services beginning at $89, we deliver preventive check-ups, immunizations, and other basic healthcare services at our more than 1,100 MinuteClinic locations at an affordable cost.

3p: Does CVS Health plan to continue expanding MinuteClinics in the U.S.? Have you set any specific targets?

EHB: MinuteClinic is a key component of our commitment to deliver accessible and affordable healthcare. We have a robust plan for continued national expansion over the next several years, and we are continuing to uncover exciting opportunities in retail medicine that will fuel growth, such as exploring the delivery of care through tele-health. This year, we are focusing on integrating our newly acquired clinics in Target stores.

3p: According to your CSR report, you're looking to expand technology-driven services via tele-health. Can you tell us more about this?

EHB: With the increased demand for patient care anticipated in future years as a result of the expansion of coverage through the Affordable Care Act, the primary care physician shortage, aging of the population and epidemic of chronic disease, tele-health gives us the opportunity to extend the reach of our MinuteClinic offerings to an expanded group of patients in a variety of convenient and cost-effective locations. We’re currently piloting several different tele-health opportunities for patients in our clinics, store locations and at home, which help improve access to low-cost quality care.

3p: Can you tell us about your Project Health programs in underserved communities, and how increasing access to health screenings and preventative care can help underserved populations increase health and wellbeing?

EHB: Despite the increased number of Americans who have become insured over the past five years, we know that barriers to receiving quality care, such as cost and access, exist for many patients. Project Health helps to relieve this pressure with over 500 events that are open to everyone, regardless of their insurance status, race or gender. Now in its 11th year, Project Health has delivered more than $112 million worth of free healthcare to predominantly Hispanic and African American communities, many of whom are uninsured or underinsured.

Patients receive an array of free comprehensive health risk assessments, including blood pressure, Body Mass Index (BMI), glucose and total cholesterol screenings, as well as on-site consultations with nurse practitioners or physician assistants who will analyze results and refer patients who require additional medical attention to no-cost or low-cost medical facilities nearby or to their primary care physician.

By increasing access to vital preventive care through Project Health events, we are not only helping patients identify chronic conditions they may be at risk for, but we are also arming them with the tools they need to take charge of their health and ultimately lead healthier lives.

When it comes to health issues like chronic disease management, patient education is vital not only for the patients' well-being, but also for economic reasons. Healthcare costs soar when individuals don't have the information to effectively manage their health issues, such as diabetes or high blood pressure.

3p: How can increased education and outreach to the underserved help people take control of their own health and manage it effectively?

EHB: In addition to helping underserved populations through Project Health, we’re also reaching this sector of patients through our partnerships with the National Association of Community Health Centers and National Association of Free and Charitable Clinics. For the past several years, the CVS Health Foundation has supported free clinics and community health centers nationwide to increase access, improve health outcomes and lower overall health costs across the country through increased patient education and chronic disease management programs.

By increasing access to quality care for the underserved populations, patients become more aware of their overall health and the resources available to them to properly take care of themselves and manage their conditions, which can ultimately lower healthcare costs across the county.

Image credit: Flickr/Jasleen Kaur

For over a year, Volkswagen has been rocked by an emissions cheating scandal that resulted in the company agreeing to pay a multibillion-dollar settlement. Germany’s largest automaker says it is trying to move on from its dodgy “defeat device” past with a renewed commitment to greener cars and electric vehicles. But it faces a long road ahead as it seeks to earn back the trust of both consumers and regulators.

But coping with a past that is largely unflattering may prove too much for the company as it struggles to move forward. Promises of more transparency and honesty from the $250 billion automaker ring even more hollow considering Volkswagen’s recent decision to dismiss the historian who spent years documenting the impact of its Nazi past.

As the New York Times reported last week, Volkswagen suddenly fired its company historian, Manfred Grieger. Grieger documented Volkswagen’s history for over 20 years and revealed much about how the company, founded in 1937 by the Nazis’ trade union organization, grew before and during World War II. At a time when many German companies were having difficulty coming to terms with their ties to the Nazi regime, Volkswagen gave Grieger the green light to write an exhaustive 1996 study chronicling the company’s use of forced labor throughout World War II.

Both Grieger and Volkswagen won plaudits for revealing the sordid ways in which the automaker contributed to the Nazi war effort with weapons and military equipment made in its Wolfsburg factory, which is still in operation today.

The historian was open about the company’s business practices, and Volkswagen allowed him unfettered access to its archives. Accounts of forced labor, children taken away from their parents and housed in horrific conditions, the SS guard presence on factory shop floors, along with descriptions of the regular beatings and shootings, were all meticulously documented. In the wake of that study, Volkswagen launched a fund in 1998 to compensate living Nazi-era workers, though critics pointed out that the individual sums were a relative pittance.

Two years ago, Grieger authored another study reviewing the World War II operations of Audi, now a subsidiary of Volkswagen. That study received scant attention until the German business publication Wirtschafts Woche published summaries of Grieger’s work in late August. The optics of that study, coupled with the recent attention spotlighting forced labor in today’s global supply chains, only piled more onto Volkswagen’s public relations woes. The publicity over Audi’s wartime history was apparently overwhelming for the company; hence Grieger was sent packing.

According to the Times, Volkswagen denied that Grieger’s contract was allowed to terminate because of the fallout over his most recent research. Nevertheless, the optics could not be worse.

And to add insult to a very injured company, Volkswagen has other human rights stories that threaten to further harm its reputation. Last year in Brazil, 12 former Volkswagen employees filed a class-action lawsuit against the company, claiming executives allowed them to be detained, blacklisted and tortured during the country’s 1964-1985 military dictatorship. The company promised to investigate the charges and issue a report on its findings. But over a year later, Volkswagen remains silent on these allegations.

If Volkswagen is ever going to rebound from this difficult year, it must press forward with more transparency and a frank discussion of its past and present challenges -- instead of appearing to sweep any mention of these incidents under the rug.

Image credit: Penn State University Library/Flickr

By James Donovan

To create “a new plan of action for people, planet and prosperity,” the United Nations developed 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015. It aimed to achieve the SDGs by fulfilling a total of 169 targets by 2030. Last year, the COP21 talks in Paris resulted in a binding, comprehensive agreement designed to confront climate change. In September, momentum for climate change action accelerated when the U.S. and China agreed to ratify the Paris agreement. Last week, the agreement formally entered into force.

Momentum is a positive development, but tackling climate change will take a sustained effort, as the SDGs and the Paris agreement plainly recognize. It will require lasting commitments from multiple parties, including governments, NGOs and businesses around the world. That’s why both the SDGs and the Paris agreement encourage businesses and governments to integrate sustainability measures into their operations and policies. But one question that remains is how best to obtain commitments from businesses on climate change action. Should outside groups, regulators or litigators lead the charge?

Some observers note that, since businesses were integral to creating the SDGs and contributed to the Paris agreement, the companies themselves are well suited — and even obligated, in part — to make clear social commitments to achieve the goals outlined. Experts who review businesses in the climate change context point out with much justification that enterprises will gain major benefits from sustainability measures, including resource conservation, greater profitability and business continuity. Credibility with consumers is another benefit that accrues to companies that promote sustainability.

But getting businesses to commit to serious sustainability measures requires overcoming a formidable hurdle: the focus on short-term goals, such as quarterly shareholder returns, in favor of action on long-term corporate social responsibilities. It’s a heavy lift because company senior leaders are under considerable pressure to deliver on goals like higher stock prices and larger investor dividends. Their compensation and position often hinge on their ability to drive higher returns, so it’s natural that meeting or exceeding revenue expectations is their primary focus.

However, there are signals of a shift in this thinking as stakeholders who have a direct revenue link to companies begin to recognize the risks of climate change. Long dismissed as a political stance or branding issue, climate change is now being perceived as an operational threat. As the president of the Reinsurance Association of America put it earlier this year, “Our industry is science based: the actuarial sciences and, in this case, the natural sciences.”

Because of their science-based approach, insurers are obligated to consider sustainability as a factor in their overall risk calculations. And that means businesses must do the same. A science-based approach to risk calculation and other sustainability-related facts are beginning to have a critical impact on long-term business strategy and profitability projections across the spectrum of industries.

One instance that illustrates this is how international companies that contend with water issues plan around the scientific fact that 50 percent or more of the groundwater in South Asia is not potable. Increasingly educated shareholders understand the risks related to sustainability. And there is growing demand for meaningful programs that take on sustainability issues as well as for responsible investment options. Thanks to shareholder involvement, adopting long-term objectives is becoming a short-term goal.

There are limits to what can be accomplished with litigation, regulation and consumer pressure; they won’t be enough to drive the deep and meaningful change necessary to meet the SDGs or limit global temperature rise. While it is important for sustainability advocates to make their case, true transformation will only happen when corporate leaders come on board for climate change action, taking a longer-term view.

There are signs this is happening, including actions by groups like the Global CEO Alliance and others. With climate change looming as an operational issue, the business case for sustainability is getting stronger.

Image credit: Flickr/Dana
James Donovan is the CEO of ADEC Innovations.

If the world’s farmers are to feed 9 billion people by 2050, technology will play a huge role. Society will have to grow more with less resources.

The fact is that American farmers have been able to increase yields while using less land for over a generation. Nevertheless, there is always room for improvement.

On that point, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently announced plans to offer up to $25 million in grants through its Conservation Innovation Grants (CIG) program. Proposals must be submitted by Jan. 9, and this year’s grant-cycle focus includes natural resources data analytics tools, precision conservation technologies and improved input management processes.

The USDA said $2 million of these funds will be set aside for grants targeted at historically underserved populations such as veterans and former military farmers and ranchers.

In the past, CIG awards were given to universities, nonprofits, and private companies developing a wide range of technologies and services. Grants funded the harvest of geothermal energy to fuel greenhouse farm operations in rural areas; next-generation anaerobic digestion technologies; manure treatment systems; and research on processes that can help scale no-till farming methods.

Success stories from past CIG awards include SmartIrrigation APPs, a startup based in northern Florida. The firm’s various apps are used by farmers in Florida and Georgia who grow a range of crops such as cotton, citrus fruit, strawberries and avocados. The apps integrate historical, real-time and weather forecasting data so farmers can irrigate their lands more efficiently.

The launch of this year’s CIG grant funding cycle piggybacks on a previous USDA commitment to distribute $20 million in grants for companies researching new solutions for forest management, food safety and crop production. Other USDA programs that aim to boost sustainability within the agriculture sector include the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, which funds programs used by farmers and ranchers to improve soil, water, plant and natural resource quality.

Meanwhile, the USDA also expanded the scope of its partnerships in order to extend more services to small farmers, find ways to improve yields through new innovations, and test new technologies that can equip farmers to help stall the risks of climate change.

Although the USDA has long been criticized for doing little more than promoting the interests of “Big Ag,” programs like CIG suggest the agency and its over 100,000 employees are undergoing a shift. Instead of solely focusing on how the nation’s farms and food companies can grow more food and find more markets, the agency says it is doing more to preserve and protect land, improve water quality and develop more sustainable methods to grow food.

In the end, these programs will help preserve farmers’ business prospects -- and their way of life -- for the long term.

Image credit: Dan Long/Flickr

A crowd recently gathered on the set of the long-running television show "Desperate Housewives" to hear about Tesla's new solar roof tiles. Tesla CEO Elon Musk is working to create a roofing product that is more durable and insulative than a traditional roof, yet with a lower installed cost and the added value of solar electricity.

The textured glass roof tiles conceal the solar cells and come in a variety of styles and colors, potentially making them more attractive than asphalt shingles. Musk then announced on Friday that Tesla will likely offer solar roofs on future cars as an option for running the defroster and generating energy.

Some Tesla critics scoffed at the roof tile announcement, asking why a car company wants to manufacture roofing products. Musk is the chairman and the largest investor in both Tesla and SolarCity. Given Tesla's $2.6 billion proposed merger with SolarCity, the announcement seems timely. Tesla and SolarCity shareholders will vote on the merger on Nov. 17, and some are having trouble understanding the advantages of a solar company and an automaker joining forces.

To proponents, Musk is a visionary who has a unique way of conducting business. The 80 percent vertical integration of Tesla highlights this point. While most other auto companies use lean manufacturing techniques, Tesla strives to manufacture most of its own components. But the company is struggling to ramp up production of its electric vehicles and is often criticized for missing production targets. Tesla is in the unique position of having products with a much higher demand than it anticipated.

SolarCity is also becoming more vertically integrated by manufacturing high-efficiency solar panels. With the five-year extension of the investment tax credit for residential and commercial solar systems, demand will certainly be strong for solar panels in the upcoming years. And Tesla's 'gigafactory' uses the most advanced solar manufacturing equipment and relies heavily on robotics, helping to keep manufacturing costs down.

“One of the reasons we can do this in North America as opposed to Asia is that we can be cost-competitive because of our equipment knowledge and we can design the plant in such a way that it can be very, very efficient,” says Steve James, Tesla senior vice president of operations.

Tesla is dedicated to producing products for the clean-energy ecosystem. Within this context, the merger with SolarCity makes sense. The company will then offer products in solar electricity generation, energy storage, and electric vehicles and is consistent with the vision of vertical integration.

If Tesla can produce a solar roof tile that is cost-effective, attractive and able to keep up with demand, it has the potential to take solar energy production to the next level. The opportunity to cross-sell solar to electric vehicle owners seems like a natural fit. Selling an attractive residential solar product fits with the Tesla brand of sophistication, innovation and performance.

Elon Musk is certainly a risk taker, a dreamer and an innovator. It will be fascinating to see the results he produces in the upcoming years.

Image courtesy of Tesla Motors (press use only) 

By Jonathan Cedar

On the outskirts of Dangiyon Ka Hundar, a small village in western India, Durga strolls down a winding path that separates the dusty main road from vast plots of farmland. It’s mid-afternoon, and she’s left crop tending early to run errands. But unlike the grocery run or quick trip to the bank you or I might typically experience, Durga’s to-do list revolves around something we take for granted every day: She’s out to collect her energy for the week.

She starts by walking a kilometer to the village well and a kilometer back home to drop the water off. She then heads out on a two-kilometer walk to meet her husband in the town center where they pay a small storefront owner to charge the family’s mobile phone. While they leave the phone to charge up for 30 minutes, they head to another shop where they purchase a liter of kerosene to light their un-electrified home and a bundle of firewood for the open cooking fire she uses every day. An hour later, they are back home and have spent up to 15 percent of their monthly income on inefficient energy sources. From a proportional standpoint, that is three times more than most middle-class American families pay for their energy utilities.

Not only are Durga’s energy sources expensive – with families paying up to US$100 per kilowatt-hour or 400 times more than the typical American to charge their mobile phone – but they’re dangerous, too: Household pollution from open cooking fires and dirty kerosene leads to serious health complications and kills 4 million people annually – more than AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined.

Durga and her family face an energy paradox, caught in the cycle of relying on bad energy sources that, in turn, put a further strain on family finances and well being. Here at BioLite, we’re out to break that cycle with innovative technology and, thanks to Durga, a viable path to ownership (more on that in a second).

BioLite’s flagship product in India and sub-Saharan Africa is a smokeless wood-burning stove that reduces toxic emissions by 90 percent, uses half the fuel, and generates usable electricity. Through in-depth market testing on willingness to pay, we were able to benchmark the price of our stove around the cost of a local mobile phone, an appliance that has proven to be a valued asset even among the lowest-income households. At roughly $40 to $50, this stove is aspirational but well within reach for almost any family – although ‘within reach’ depends heavily on the financial levers available to the household.

A wakeup from Durga

At BioLite, we have a team of trained local staff who give compelling village demonstrations of the HomeStove. Our sales agents light the stove, boil water, cook local foods, charge phones, and explain in detail the long-term cost savings of HomeStove ownership -- most notably that the stove pays for itself in less than a year thanks to saving on fuel and mobile charging.

Durga attended one of these demonstrations with her husband and was eager to learn more about bringing this into the home. However, upon hearing the upfront cost of $50, Durga hit a roadblock; it wasn’t the harvest season, so the family’s cash reserves were low. However, the ever-resourceful Durga offered up an alternative: Could she pay for the stove in installments? She had previous experience taking out business loans for her farm equipment and a stellar track record of paying them back on time. She asked: Couldn’t the same be done here?

Durga was onto something.

No matter how compelling our demonstrations might be, we weren’t going to sell our product if our customers don’t have the cash on hand. For most rural households in our markets, income is sporadic and seasonal, and we needed to offer an alternative to upfront cash sales.

Think about it this way: Here in the United States, many of us are pitched on the benefits of solar roof installation. Solar systems are highly efficient and offer long-term savings – but we are rarely asked to pay the $30,000 installation fee upfront. We have access to rebates, installment plans and ways to make these significant investments feasible without tying up all of our cash. This is exactly why consumer financing and credit exist: to make purchasing high-ticket items accessible to a wide network of potential customers. BioLite customers in the United States make purchases using credit, why shouldn’t our customers in India be able to do the same?

Microfinance and liquidity stability

Microfinance enables low-income families to access small loans, which they can invest in businesses and assets that can generate income and improve living standards. Over that past few decades, Microfinance institutions (MFIs) have changed the way millions of low-income people, particularly women in the developing world, access capital. Credit can be the difference between a bare plot of land and a flourishing farm, a husband and wife trying to find daily work and a family owned and operated business.

Consider Durga who works as a farm hand. When it is not harvest season, cash on hand is scarce. MFIs offer her stable liquidity through small loans, giving her the opportunity to start a business, purchase land or equipment for their farm, or weather crises. Families like Durga’s get a jumpstart to fulfill financial aspirations.

It is hard to think of a better place for us to reach potential customers than when they are making investments in their financial future. In 2015, we began partnering with local MFIs across India and sub-Saharan Africa. These partnerships open our network to millions of new customers who can easily adjust their loans to include our product.

BioLite's MFI Partners

A typical MFI customer looks a lot like Durga: a hard working mother looking for a way to contribute to the family income. Durga borrows from Fullerton, an MFI we partnered with in 2015.

When visiting her local branch to borrow US$300 for farming equipment, she met a BioLite sales agent, who gives HomeStove demonstrations to borrowers like Durga. At the end of each demonstration, sales agents let borrowers know they can finance a HomeStove for $4.50 a month via a one-year loan. There is little risk associated with a product that pays for itself based on energy savings in less than a year, and has the stamp of approval from your loan officer.

Small payments, big return

Thanks to her good standing as a Fullerton customer, Durga added a HomeStove to her loan and went home with a life-saving product. She pays the stove off incrementally every other week, and each week her path looks much different.

Now, rather than spending excess rupees on firewood or kerosene, Durga uses collects sticks on her way home and uses the HomeStove to power an LED light and the family’s mobile phone. Instead of spending 10 to 15 percent of the family’s monthly income on energy, she generates power from a cooking fire and uses it how and when she sees fit.

But for Durga, the small HomeStove loan did much more than give her more the chance to supplement her family’s income and energy in the home. The HomeStove gives Durga more time to spend with her family and with that time a bright light that she uses to read to her two sons after the sun goes down each night.

Thanks to MFI partnerships, it’s not only Durga who benefits. Our MFI partners allow our sales agents to reach tens of thousands of other women just like Durga. During these demonstrations, we not only educate new customers on the benefits of a clean, safe and reliable energy alternative, but we also help them get access to financing to bring these life-saving products into their homes.

MFIs are a critical lever in allowing BioLite to scale our efforts and bring us a step closer to reaching all of the families looking to break out of the cycle of energy poverty.

Images courtesy of BioLite.

Jonathan Cedar is CEO and co-founder of BioLite, a social enterprise that develops and manufactures clean, affordable energy systems for off-grid communities around the world. This article is part of BioLite’s The Road To Impact  series which takes an in-depth look at their work in emerging markets.

Editor's note: This is the second post in a three-part series on science-based corporate climate targets. In case you missed it, you can read the first part here. 

By Tobias Schultz

Science-based targets (SBTs) are vital for companies seeking to help move the needle on global greenhouse gas emissions.

Setting an SBT for your organization involves developing an emissions-reduction target consistent with the world’s carbon mitigation needs in order to hold global mean temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) already provided the roadmap. Companies setting science-based targets are being recognized publicly for their efforts via the We Mean Business coalition.

So, how can you set an SBT for your organization? It begins by identifying your company’s emissions, considering the three scopes of emissions defined by the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard: Scope 1, 2 and 3. Your SBTs will differ in type for each scope.

For Scope 1 and 2 emissions, which are owned or controlled by your company (think: electricity and natural gas usage), receiving recognition for setting an SBT requires establishing a concrete emission-reduction target tied to what is needed for the 2-degree pathway. Scopes 1 and 2 can be considered the low-hanging fruit here, since you directly control them. You just have to set the appropriate targets and commit to them.

Companies may choose to set their SBT target using the basic levels of decarbonization the IPCC says we need by 2035 (i.e., absolute reductions of 50 percent for both CO2 and methane emissions, and 80 percent for black carbon). However, your company can set “intensity-based” targets as well, which are based upon GHG emissions per dollar of revenue.

It is also permissible to set industry-specific targets. The International Energy Agency (IEA) states that some sectors have greater responsibility to decarbonize: Service-sector buildings must decrease GHG intensity by roughly 40 percent, while a paper manufacturer, for example, must drop GHG emissions by 60 percent during the same time frame. You can set your company apart by choosing a more aggressive target.

Scope 3 emissions come from organizational operations your company doesn’t directly control, such as employee commuting and supply chain logistics. The lack of direct influence over these emissions makes them harder to reduce, so more flexibility is allowed in setting a Scope 3 SBT. While no specific quantitative target is required to claim establishing an SBT for your organization, companies are expected to set “ambitious and measurable Scope 3 targets with a clear time frame” in order to be recognized publicly by most climate groups.

In setting an SBT, we recommend exploring the feasibility of reaching a specified target level before going public. You certainly don’t want to commit to an objective that is not feasible.

This can be a learning exercise that brings concrete benefits to your organization. The deep dive required can help you answer questions such as: Where are our greatest opportunities for improvements in energy efficiencies and resulting cost savings? Including Scope 3 emissions in your target will provide valuable insights into your supply chain, your employees’ business travel, and other unanticipated emissions sources. You’re likely to uncover potential risk mitigation and cost savings otherwise overlooked.

Image credit: Flickr/Tony Webster

Tobias Schultz is Manager of Corporate Sustainability Services for SCS Global Services, where he designs and implements corporate sustainability programs for clients, including the development of quantitative life cycle assessments (LCAs) and the analysis of the environmental performance of global supply chains. SCS is a worldwide leader in independent, third-party environmental certification.

Schultz can be reached at tschultz@scsglobalservices.com