In the EU, a carbon emissions Cap and Trade system is in place to help fight global warming. Companies must buy carbon permits if they emit more than allotted, and are allowed to sell permits if their emissions are less than allotted.

A German court found six men guilty for conspiring to evade taxes on carbon permits in the European Union from 2009 to 2010. They evaded taxes through a ‘carousal trade’ wherein emissions permits are imported into one country without paying the value add tax and them selling them.

Judge Martin Bach in the Frankfurt district court convictions ranged from three to seven years and 10 months.

Apparently imprisonment is another unpredicted impact of global warming.

For example today I picked up that there was a significant bust related to stolen recyclable plastic (definitely a sign of our times), the EPA’s 2010 national analysis of its Toxics Release Inventory indicated that the release of toxics are actually up from the prior years’ data (boo), more electric vehicles are being designed (even VW coming out with an e-Bugster) and everyone is busy with their predictions for 2012 or summaries of the prior year – as is common for January (Greenomics does this too.)

But one of the writers decided that instead of looking to the future for our groundbreaking technologies and innovations – we should be looking around the corner. While I appreciate what he is saying, I find that we are all really into saying things these days – like we are looking for innovation in language itself. Hmmm. Maybe we should be looking down the alley or how about scanning the dumpster? Got me thinking about how we are using language in the Business of Sustainability.

One of the things I find interesting and useful but also irksome is the continued addition of terms and the need for redefining them. I know they all are important and specific to different things like supply chain management and not all of them are that hard to remember because they paint a reasonable picture in our minds– closed loops, cradle to cradle, biomimicry are all good examples. While we introduce this vocabulary to the mainstream to describe processes and resource usage I suspect we lose ever more people’s interest because they cant keep up with the jargon. No one likes to feel like they are out of the closed loop.

There is the added problem that comes from Greenwashing which is an abuse of words at its finest – eco in the front of anything is good, like eco-clean, or enviro – perhaps there should be an enviro-girl and she has green tights, but no cape. She will fight stains in her laundry and the bathtub with eco-alert enviro-particles. But most of us are used to this type of marketing – think of the invented names for facial creams; “micro vive cellular extending molecules”.

The other problem is the boring debate between professionals who are specialists in one field or the other. I did rather enjoy an article that talked about the difference between eco-efficiency and sustainability and that is because it answered for me why I am so uncomfortable every time they trot out Wal-Mart as a shining example of anything. The difference in these words is resource use versus resource availability.

Measuring how much water or energy we used compared to last year is simply about use itself and if we use less of anything – that must be better. But the main point is that we need to look at the location of the business, how much water is actually available and reasonably shared by the community at large, and what should be the prorata allotment to the business compared to what it takes out of the system. Is it sustainable at the current rate? And what if companies actually reported in those terms?

Because I have to say when I hear that someone used a whole lot less of anything than they did before I think –Wow, they are putting a really good spin on the fact that they were horribly inefficient and irresponsible with their resource use. Damn straight they better fix that before somebody catches on and determines fees and regulations around paying for those inefficiencies and waste…but then that’s probably just around the corner.

Full page, full colour advertisements came out in the past month promoting its “Recycle your Ride” program, which is described as a “great incentive for consumers looking to save on their next vehicle while responsibly recycling their old one.” While they are using language typical for sustainable business practices, the program is in fact no different than rebate programs that have been around for many years and what used to be called a “trade in” is now being given a nice green coat of paint.

Their stated goal is “to replace as many older vehicles still on the road today with more fuel-efficient, lower-emission FORD cars, CUVs, SUVs, and trucks.” Originally they only accepted cars from 2005 and NEWER, which have the mileage and pollution control standards of the current EPA standards, however, now in the last year of the program, they are “willing” to take vehicles from 2005 and older. What is not mentioned is that most of the environmental impact of a car is made through the manufacturing process and that by “recycling your ride” every 6 years is far more damaging than keeping your old vehicle tuned up. Plus, does this mean they will no longer take trade ins at all? How does this help the environment?

We argue that this type of greenwashing frustrates people who are trying to do the right thing and even turns people against the company that is using sustainable language to repackage a program that already existed. FORD should be able to do better and actually recycle all trade ins (of at least their own vehicles) as part of a cradle to cradle/closed loop process. Real leaders in automotive manufacturer are working on solutions to take back their products and reuse all the materials. – in perpetuity.

• Resource Recovery Assessments
• Community Needs Assessment
• Financial Analysis – The Business Case
• Site Analysis and Selection
• Facilities Design and Site Planning
• Project Implementation
• Stakeholder Engagement
• Community Liaison
• Post project assessments and Reviews for continuous improvement

What is Resource Recovery?

Resource Recovery is the extraction of useful resources that would otherwise be dumped at a landfill. The range of materials that can be viably extracted from typical waste streams includes compostables, metal, glass, paper, Styrofoam, cardboard, electronics, and plastics.
Our approach helps Municipalities, Regional Districts and other organizations achieve:

• Zero Waste Goals through Resource Recovery
• Community based employment opportunities
• Economic Development
• Social Engagement – opportunities to connect with community
• Behavioural Change
• Increased Revenues
• Reduced Waste Disposal Costs, and
• A Progressive Community Image

Macro Developments

1. China

its uninterrupted 20 years of continuous economic growth is going to suffer a setback due to severe environmental degradation, increased social unrest, bad loans, and a backlash against cheap products.

2. Canada

its international reputation will continue to decline due to its “fire sale” approach to resource extraction such as the tar sands (oil sands) and shale gas and hydraulic fracking, and its failure to address greenhouse gas emissions.

3. EU

Despite its current debt crisis, the EU will continue due to its willingness to tackle the issue and its leadership in social and environmental stewardship.

4. United States

While our friends to the south will be distracted by their upcoming election, it will be restarting its economic engine led by its innovative strength by developing quality products and services that use alternatives to fossil fuels and realize efficiency gains in resource use.

People Developments

5. Consciousness Empowerment

There will be a significant increase in community based consciousness that focuses on meeting the social needs of the community as well as addressing local environmental issues. While this consciousness has always been there, it will be empowered through Web 2.0 technologies similar to those that supported the overthrow of many dictators and the emergence of the Occupy Wall Street movement in 2011.

6. Rethinking Capitalism

Small to medium sized businesses are the backbone of the G-20, and their voices will begin to emerge and influence the playing field by becoming more coordinated with a bottom up approach to economic development at the community level.

Environmental Developments

7. Accelerated Warming

We will begin to see signs of accelerated global warming as some of the positive feedback mechanisms, such as the release of methane gases from thawing tundra, will begin to contribute to the overall GHG contributions, which now approach 400 PPM, nearly 50 ppm above the target of 350 to keep climate change to a 2 degree increase.

8. Conflicting Demands

The progress that has been made in restoring renewable resources such as fish stocks will be undermined by government permits that enable increased fishing. If stock resilience calculations are incorrect the gains will be lost.

Profit Developments

9. Green Teams to Audits

While Green Teams in corporations have made positive strides in implementing more sustainable business practices, their effectiveness is often limited. Businesses will need to start measuring and managing what matters in order to secure contracts and work with their clients who will increasingly demand the information. This will mean the formalization of sustainability management and tools to further realize gains in financial performance of sustainable practices.

10. Alternative Energy

Globally, the cost for renewable energy solutions such as photovoltaics and wind will be comparable to fossil fuel based technologies, although there will not be much profit in the industry itself due to a supply glut.

While attending a Round Table hosted by the Canada West Foundation, the rational was made clear. Those who are against extracting the oil still use the old “Tarsands” words and those who want to pursue the ethical extraction of oil use the new “Oilsands.” So, whether you have an opinion on the “oilsands” or have just used ‘tarsands’ all your life, your stance may already be made.

• Are the materials used thrown away when no longer wanted, or can they be recycled, upcycled, repurposed, or reused?
• What is the alternative to turning it into garbage?
• How does it align with the Zero Waste concept?
• How does resource productivity and waste align?

In our Business of Sustainability Workshop, we present “resource productivity” as a key characteristic of a sustainable business, and now is the season to “Shop till you Drop!”

“One-Stop-Dropping” is a concept from the recycling community that means there is one place where you can go to drop off all the things you no longer want.

This includes everything from plastic containers to baby furniture to glass containers and compostables. The idea is to simplify the confusion of what can and cannot be recycle, make it convenient, and be a community resource for learning and possibly emergencies. Of course, developing the concept is one thing, but turning it into a profitable business model is quite another. But we found a functional model in our own backyard here in Gibsons!

Gibsons is a town located on British Columbia’s Sunshine Coast and is famous for being the location for the CBC’s TV series “The Beach Combers”. It is also the location for the “The Gibsons Resource Recovery Center” which is owned and operated by Buddy Boyd and his partner Barbara Hetherington. Their operation is the largest non-government funded operation of its kind in BC, and has never received taxpayer’s money. Rather, it generates revenue by selling clean recyclables and by mining the discard stream. It also creates local jobs by employing 13 people in a region that is struggling economically.

The jobs created by the centre support a recent report prepared by the Tellus Institute with Sound Resource Management which suggests the United States could generate an additional 2.4 million jobs by tackling its waste issues through strategies such as one-stop-dropping. As adeptly stated by Boyd, his operation excels at “reclaiming garbage and putting it back into the community, not the ground.’”

In addition to the typical recycling associated with curb side service, the centre accepts electronics, Styrofoam, plastic films, paint cans and aerosol sprays, CFL lighting, and miscellaneous items such as book shelves, chairs, picture frames, and so on. There is even a knife sharpening service. Its goal is to incorporate composting, educational facilities, a café, and other amenities that would help a community transition from wasting to maximizing its resources.

Further, from a user perspective, it makes waste management easy and takes out the guess work. Upon arrival at the site with garbage in hand, trained and friendly staff is on hand to answer questions and help sort your waste (aka garbage). It makes it easy and reduces greenhouse gases (GHGs) by allowing people to drop off their recyclables on the way to get groceries or do other shopping. Two trips for the price of one!

In addition to being a viable business, such centres can quantifiably contribute to:

• Public Education
• Community Engagement
• Reduced Waste Removal Costs
• Reduced Taxes
• Zero Waste Goals
• Local Economic Development

So, If you are interested in learning how this concept can help your municipality reduce costs and achieve Zero Waste goals, please contact us! Perhaps the best gift this season to your community will be a new business operator, jobs, savings, and reduced GHGs.

I think the best way to alienate people from what you are about to say is to start with “in my day”. Well, today is “my day” and I don’t like filling it with unnecessary information and wasting time on menial chores. I have a friend who remembers everything – no matter how unimportant. Used to win all his pie in that trivial game with answers to obscure questions. But did he know about melamine in milk based products and candies from China? Grocery shopping used to be a simple task and we were more brand focused – trusted brands. More families, more doctors, more vets trust Brand X. That trust made shopping a little easier, not necessarily fun, but certainly not fraught with angst. Why angst? Well for one thing, not everything is what it seems and I want to have a positive impact through my purchasing power.

If a product is great, I want them to keep making it. I dislike the feeling of being tricked into buying something for reasons that don’t make sense. I don’t buy dish liquid that’s great for my hands (because I wear rubber gloves when I do that hated chore) and I want the stuff that gets the dishes clean – I will use hand lotion for my hands if I need it. I can use common sense to tell me that’s not a factor for my purchase, but for instance, I am not sure about the true biodegradability of many cleaners – how long does it take? And under what conditions? Do I long for the day when things were simpler? Not really, because from what I hear most people had to walk 20 kilomters to school, uphill both ways. No, I just want better tools to figure out the truth. ( ok – I hear Jack Nicholson telling me I can’t handle the truth and sometimes he’s right – look up “cashews from Vietnam” and tell me you still want those buttery nuggets soaked in the tears of forced labourers in drug reform camps where an overwhelming percentage of the world’s cashews are processed.)

I remember spraying aerosols around like there was no tomorrow (pun intended). It was fun – I liked the sound and the even spray. I actually enjoyed dusting and cleaning windows and all of that spraying stuff. Yes, I know some people’s parents used vinegar and newspaper. No fun at all. But then there was a hole in the ozone layer and boom – bye bye CFC’s. Hello pumps. Early versions really sucked too – big thick irregular splats, little hose tubes that didn’t reach the product on the bottom that you could clearly see but not use not matter what angle you tilted it to. Those have definitely improved.

On the food front, I would say the mighty chicken and its proverbial eggs did come first. I crossed the road to get the free run eggs. I paid more but the benefits of the eggs were really simple to grasp. Then they started to offer free run organic eggs. So then I had to wonder – were my free running chickens chased through pesticides and eating chemicals? Okay so Organic it is -more money, better tasting eggs, no poison for me or the earth. Again, clear benefits. And then there is the Humane Society stamp of approval that has started in the UK and is spreading to points here. New question: was my free running organic chicken treated well? Killed kindly? How could I not want this too? But here’s where the angst comes in – all these eggs sit beside each other on the shelf with their various price differences, and I see people taking the regular, tortured, poisonous, cooped chicken eggs and I think about them. I wonder if it is a budget issue – poor person has to eat those eggs because they haven’t got much money and can’t pay $6.99 for a dozen eggs or else you might think – evil person, doesn’t care – just to save a dollar his chicken is tormented and forced to do drugs.

I can’t expect everyone to feel the same way I do about making decisions in the aisles of the grocery or drug store. But if you know fully what goes into things, it really helps make the decision clear about whether or not to buy them. I don’t think it’s too much to ask – tell us what it is and where it came from. Not who it’s “imported by” because that is not “where”. When we heard about the melamine it didn’t take any time at all for us to say no to that. But can I know every ingredient and what its affects are? Should I know the reputation of every company that makes the products and should I be on top of any regulations that come along? Can I spot green washing and green halos on products that don’t deserve them? There is this great opportunity to take a stand on things right where it counts – at the checkout counter – and I feel horribly under-informed about the options. And I don’t have time to study every product, not to mention that they keep changing them so they are “new and improved”.

When I first discovered the Good Guide app for my iphone, I couldn’t believe my good fortune. Here is a free app that lets you scan a product barcode with your phone and reveal a rating for some 140,000 products from personal care to pet food based on the environmental, social and health aspects of the product, plus it has additional filters you can select to indicate what matters to you most from fair trade to nutrients to scientifically proven hazards, energy efficiency and so on. Wow. I reviewed the website, looked at how the ratings were derived, noted that they give companies the opportunity to contest, with evidence, their rating and that they do not appear to be guided by advertising. A quote “Use our ratings to help make purchasing decisions that match your preferences for healthy, green or socially responsible products. Our ratings provide a credible way to easily rank products and companies, enabling you to pick the best in a category or identify alternative products you could switch to”. The biggest problem with this app is that it works on the standard UPC codes of US products.

I thought the whole point of Universal Product Codes was to make them universal. The universe is smaller than I thought. I scanned dozens of products in my home and in the store. Not found. “There is another bar code called EAN-13, which is commonly used in Europe and other countries. Since Canadian products are coded using both systems, the scanner will not work with everything on the shelves” according to Mia Gralla, Marketing Manager, GoodGuide, Inc., who responded very promptly when queried, “Currently, we are focusing on profiling products that comprise most of the market share in the U.S. There is a possibility to expand to other countries such as Canada in the future, but we do not have any concrete plans.” This is disappointing not only to me, but too many of the folks rating the app in the iTunes store. While we can’t effectively scan in Canada or Europe or anywhere outside the US at the moment, you can still bring up the items currently rated in categories such as personal care and hope that you recognize some labels on your local shelf that have a decent rating. It’s a good start, GoodGuide.

I’d like to see it really bloom – maybe using those cute little QR (Quick Response) codes that are popping up. They take up less space than UPC and offer thousands of pieces of information in one quick scan. They are being used to send scanners to websites for details on everything from upcoming movies, new product launches, real estate listings, feature comparisons for electronics, and more. Maybe in Our Day we will have a tool like this and can use it to make some real social and environmental change. After all – we got rid of the CFCs, and hopefully the melamine, maybe we can get rid of grocery store angst too.

China has become the manufacturing giant of the world and has had unprecedented economic growth at 8-10% annually for the past 20+ years. As the second largest global economy, and rapidly closing the gap with the United States, China is expected to become number one, using the old GDP model, by 2020. Can this be sustained?

The massive scale of this experiment challenges the belief that sustainable economic growth is not possible without providing people with a good quality of life and without ensuring a healthy environment. Perhaps, through a combination of engineering and technology, we can harness nature and control people in a manner that allows us to keep growing unhindered. As happened with industrialized nations, and now with developing nations, economic growth is dependent upon two key factors: extraction from natural resources and abundance of cheap labour. So let’s take a look at these in terms of China’s growth.

Natural Resources

In 2010, China’s Ministry of the Environment noted that over 40% of its water is only suitable for industrial purposes due to pollution. Chinese Academy of Engineering and Ministry of Environmental Protection reported that 25% of China’s underground water is polluted. The province of Hubei’s Environmental Protection Bureau announced that more than 50% of the province’s lakes were severely polluted: 53% could only be used for industrial production and recreational activities, so long as there is no direct human contact. Further degradation is predictable as China’s new 5 year plan for renewable energy gets underway with the construction of more than 60 large-scale hydropower projects.

Labour

Nankai University reported that in 2009 China had nearly 90,000 “mass incidents” (protests of 100 or more people). Many of the incidents were over environmental concerns while the remainder was mostly political or working conditions related. These incidents are causing the authorities to respond. For example, a toxic spill at the Zijinshan Copper Mine, the biggest gold producer in China, led to the arrest of 2 former Fujian Province environmental protection officials in 2010. While at the same time the city of Dalian ordered the shutdown of a paraxylene (a toxic chemical used in plastics and synthetic fibres) chemical plant in response to tens of thousands of residents protesting over pollution concerns.

Since human rights do not appear to be at the forefront of China’s growth strategy these rare responses are unlikely to curb growing social unrest. There are even reports that the “one child rule” has caused a decrease in the female population so substantially that the disproportionate male population is frustrated, aggravated, and more susceptible to uprisings. Reports of women being kidnapped from one village to another are increasing and have historically led to internal social conflict.

Global think tanks such as STRATFOR predict there will be a collapse in China due to thin profit margins, its dependence on continued Western consumption, and a birthrate that will lead to qualitative and quantitative labour shortages. Others argue that credit excesses in China will lead to its collapse. Some predict 2020 will be the breaking point, however, even they do not fully account for environmental and social degradation.
As a major test case in the sustainability equation, let’s keep an eye on whether the assumption that sustainable economic growth does in fact need environmental and social stewardship. Given the exponential changes being witnessed this century, the Arab Spring for one, at Greenomics we will be bold and propose the experiment will unravel within the next 5 years unless the world intervenes in some way – but after Kyoto and Copenhagen, you know where we are putting our money.

Follow where this Article is Read

by Karen Peterson

The Green Eye takes a look at the struggles we face every day trying to do the right thing. The path toward sustainability requires a conscious effort to change, especially as a consumer. There is more pressure on us now, much self inflicted, to think about “what becomes of things once consumed” and we are also ever more mindful of the old adage “you are what you eat”.

Short of time, and sometimes money, we find ourselves in the impossible position of trying to:

• get good value for what we spend,
• enjoy the things we like, deserve and want, and
• do the right thing for the world, our families and our futures.

It shouldn’t be as hard as it is to sort this all out- 20 minutes in front of the dish soap aisle at my local grocer is an unreasonable amount of time to spend deciding between price points, ingredients, trusted brands, and assessing environmental claims against green washing. The Green Eye grows weary of weighing out chemicals, colours, fragrances, biodegradability, natural, organic, and everything else. Fragrance was a dirty word for a while but now there are scents in absolutely everything again. Are they ok now? What’s changed?

It should not be surprising that the first time you read the Green Eye it focuses on why it might be time to chop up that Costco card. I have to start somewhere, and Costco, I am sorry – but it has to start with you.

Beyond the fatiguing experience of concrete warehouse aesthetics, the disbelief at the till tape before the bouncer at the door runs a felt pen through it (maybe they didn’t remember that 4 gallon jug was $3 off?) and beyond the knowledge that I have never escaped with just what I came for and a bill of less than three hundred dollars, there must be a reason that I continued to go there. I have stood in the aisles with an overwhelming sense of doom under looming stacks of products that are all going to end up in the landfill or recycling bins or in the ocean somehow. Does the excitement of getting a good deal really override my conscience that tells me – this kind of shopping is wrong?

When you buy things in volume, you become the warehouse. Your fridge and freezer, your cupboards and shelves. All overstocked. And the oversupply of products renders their use a little bit haphazard. Because you want the cupboard door or the fridge to close, you may use more product, more recklessly than if it were, say, the last toilet paper roll instead of one of 48. Interesting just how few squares you can get away with when you know your supply is limited. And when you have a vat of anything with an expiry date – you better find a way to eat all of it before it goes. And it goes…. down the drain, in the toilet, in the garbage and sometimes in the compost.

While many say “Costco is great for a family” I am pretty hard pressed to meet anyone with more than one or two children these days, if any. Do they need loaf sized blocks of cheese or cereal boxes so big they don’t fit in the pantry? And incidentally we are all so sick of a brand or flavour by two thirds of the way through the mega size that we might just throw its stale remainder out after a month or so.

I have found that juice boxes, toilet paper, and just about everything else, go on sale in the regular grocery store often enough that with an only moderately watchful eye, you can save money, have variety, and waste far less. The other big plus is that Safeway, IGA, Whole Foods and all the others are wising up to consumer demand for local and organic, refillable, enviro-packaged, and all else more in keeping with the way we should be headed.

We still have some decisions to make in the aisles – there’s a lot of choice out there, but I believe that by keeping the products in your home and office in a manageable, human scale, you will use less and make wiser choices. If you pay a bit more, maybe you will treat things as just a little less disposable and a little more precious. If sustainability’s biggest hurdle is change in behaviour, then this little change could mean a lot for old mother earth and for your sanity.

Sorry Costco – snip snip.

Next Month
Examples of Greenwashing, and the “Good Guide”