Who says everyone in the sustainability movement is guided by altruistic principles? We certainly do not, and we monitor for transgressions just to remind us to keep up our vigilance. This time we find $391,000,000 in carbon credit tax evasion in the EU!

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.

By K E Peterson
I have RSS feeds and automatic subscriptions to a plethora of Sustainable/Green/Business online magazines, newsletters and informational sites. I scan them for common themes and scroll through quickly to pick up the threads of current conversations.

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.

FORD Motor Company has made great strides in reducing its environmental footprint in the past 10 years by reducing its global water use by 62%, or 39.7 billion litres, which, if the average person requires 2.5 litres of water every day, that’s enough water for every person on the planet for over two days. FORD is building on this success with its stated goal of a further 30% reduction by 2015. This is remarkable and demonstrates the scope of opportunities that exist in pursuing sustainable business practices. For this, FORD gets kudos. However, FORD’s marketing department disappoints with its recent “Recycle your Ride” program.

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.

Anticipating evolving needs is critical to all organizations wishing to stay ahead of the competition, develop innovative solutions, and provide the best service possible. A key driver for the 21st century is the efficient use of resources, as global demand continues to rise, and virgin sources are depleted. This presents a new opportunity to capture resources headed for a landfill, thus reducing waste removal costs, generating revenue, and supporting local economic development. Greenomics has partnered with Gibsons Recycling Depot and Site Economics to create an innovative approach to help municipalities, regional districts, and others to seize this opportunity.
Our approach not only addresses Zero Waste goals, it also stimulates local economic development, public awareness, and identifies ways to generate revenue. As a collaborative consultancy we offer the following:

• 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

Welcome to 2012, this is going to be a year of great change, some good and some a little scary. We’ve developed our top 10 predictions based on research, our associated articles from last year, combined with crystal ball gazing with our friends and colleagues. We also decided to take a bold approach based on the assumption of ongoing exponential rates of change.

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.