The Verdant 360 Blog

If you read nothing else about sustainability you should read this article.

It was a little ironic that immediately following my post about  being over “green,” I came upon this article published in Scientific American, “Top 10 Myths about Sustainability.” In four pages author Michael D. Lemonick presents what he terms The Top 10 Myths. By consulting with several experts, including author and Smith & Hawken co-founder Paul Hawkens, he disputes the myths with arguments that are rational, illuminating and honest. Along the way,  he de-links the term “green” and sustainability, something that I believe is essential if we are going to get real traction on a governmental and business level.

When a word becomes so popular you begin hearing it everywhere, in  all sorts of marginally related or even unrelated contexts, it means one of two things. Either the word has devolved into a meaningless cliche or it has real conceptual heft. “Green” (or, even worse, “going green”) falls squarely into the first category. But “sustainable,” which at first conjures up a similarly vague sense of environmental virtue, actually belongs in the second.

I  wish I had put it that way in my last post, but I did get to mention “green” beer. Mr. Lemonick did not get into the virtues of “green” beer, but what he does do is clearly state the obvious myths and then deconstruct them in such as fashion as to clearly define sustainability, explain it’s importance and demonstrate the economic value of pursuing a sustainable strategy. The 10 Myths per the author are:

1. Nobody knows what sustainability really means.
2. Sustainability is all about the environment.
3. “Sustainable is a synonym for “green.”
4. It’s all about recycling.
5. Sustainability is too expensive.
6. Sustainability means lowering our standard of living.
7. Consumer choices and grassroots activism, not government intervention, offer the fastest most efficient routes to sustainability.
8. New technology is always the answer.
9. Sustainability is ultimately a population problem.
10. Once you understand the concept, living sustainably is a breeze to figure out.

There is a lot of noise in the media and on the web that reinforces these myths. Misconceptions obscure the value and benefits of sustainability, but Mr. Lemonick addresses each of the myths in a scholarly and measured voice. The result is article that is succinct, eminently readable and clarifies these common misconceptions.

It is becoming clearer that more and more academic, business and governmental thought leaders are seeing sustainability as a necessary path to economic prosperity, social equality and environmental stewardship. It is important the real costs and benefits are explained in a way that allows leaders to make informed decisions, based on real statistical data, accurate financial models and unbiased scientific study.

We live on a planet with limited physical resources but possessing unlimited human potential. If we maximize that potential we can minimize the negative impacts of our activities. If we cannot we will have challenges that dwarf even those we are facing today.

-FR

Sustainability enviroment, green, Michael D. Lemonick, Scientific American, Sustainability

With the release of his new budget, President Obama has reinforced his commitment to reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)’s. Although the mechanisms for quantifying and report  GHG emissions are still being debated, we are clearly moving in the direction of carbon footprint reporting. This is setting the stage for a true cap and trade scenario. According to his budget, Obama is projecting that cap and trade will amount to $300 billion in tax revenue by 2022 and that by 2012 the cap and trade program will begin to have budgetary impact.

What this all means for business leaders is that we will need to be prepared to address this scenario. Although 2012 seems a long way off, particularly given the current economic challenges, the complexity of the issue is such that we need to prepare now. Indeed House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman has brought forth legislation which he vows to have approved by Memorial Day that will limit carbon emissions. The Bill entitled The Safe Climate Act of 2007 (H.R.1590) has set very specific targets.

The Safe Climate Act freezes U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2010, at the 2009 levels. Beginning in 2011, it cuts emissions by roughly 2% per year, reaching 1990 emissions levels by 2020. After 2020, it cuts emissions by roughly 5% per year. By 2050, emissions will be 80% lower than in 1990. These goals are comparable to emissions reduction goals adopted by many states and called for by leading American companies, small businesses, religious organizations, environmental advocates, and others

The bill is supported by GE’s Jeffrey Immelt and Duke Energy’s Jim Rodgers both of whom endorsed the legislation at a session with the committee in January and lays the groundwork for a cape and trade program.

It is not surprising that many business leaders are not focusing on the issue of trade at the moment. Given that many businesses are simply striving to survive the current economic crisis, it may not seem a priority. However, the fact remains that should the legislation pass as promised by Memorial Day, it leaves businesses 6 months to quantify there 2009 carbon footprint and prepare to meet or lower them for 2010. Building on the assumption that the economy turns around and economic activity increases, businesses will almost certainly have to have a plan to lower emissions just to meet their 2009 emissions.

-FR

Carbon Footprint cap and trade, Carbon Footprint, carbon offsets, GHG's, green