BT Thought Leadership on environmental business opportunities...

A major international study by the Economist Intelligence Unit, sponsored by BT, has revealed that organizations are failing to realize business benefits from sustainability programs. While almost half (46 per cent) said that sustainability programs helped improve brand value, just one in five (20 per cent) felt they improved profitability.

The research indicates that, while sustainability may be firmly on the boardroom agenda as organizations compete for a 'responsible' reputation, executives have yet to find a way to harness it as a commercial force. One third (33 per cent) of respondents admitted that their company only makes sustainability efforts in markets where it is perceived to have an impact on customers' perceptions of the firm, and a similar proportion (31 per cent) admitted that their company's sustainability efforts mostly center on communication, rather than actual change.

Intel makes its insides greener.

Intel have announced that theirs new chip factory (Fab32) is among the company's most environmentally friendly, incorporating a number of energy and water conservation measures. Intel intends to certify the facility as the company's first official Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards factory based on new criteria being developed for Fabs by the Green Building Council.

Temporary disruption

 

I'm off to Iceland for the week, so forgive the more sporadic updating. Back on the 2nd!

Interbrand to moderate sustainability conference.

Although I'm not sure what 'moderate' implies, it certainly suggests branding agencies are becoming more and more interested in green brands - both internal and external.

The conference is the Ethical Corporation "Employee Engagement for a Sustainable business" event, on the 3-4 December.

http://www.ethicalcorp.com/employee-engagement/

The future of offsetting?

What about putting an optional offset on food too? Tills could be programmed not just with price details but also with carbon emissions. I bet the cost would be so small I might even pay it...

Silverjet makes offsetting optional.

Silverjet has backed down from it's industry-leading compulsory offsett scheme, citing the doubling of air passenger duty for business-only airlines as the motivation behind the action. At £80, the APD is no small sum.

Lawrence Hunt, Silverjet CEO, said: “we feel that given the doubling of APD as well as growing recognition for the ‘polluter pays’ principle, it is right for us to offer an opt-out option for our own carbon offsetting scheme and let customers decide whether they wish to pay the extra amount."

Now here's a thought - since the polluter should be paying, who do you think will be the first airline to include an optional offset in their fare, payable by them to the environmental cause of your choice?

This seems appropriate...

http://www.chrismadden.co.uk/

Design competition - last call!

Premier Farnell plc has announced its expert panel of judges for the international design competition, 'Live Edge' - Electronic Design for the Global Environment. Since its launch in May 2007 over 3,200 design engineers and students from 102 countries have registered to submit their designs to create an innovative product that utilises electronic components and has a positive impact on the environment. There's still time to register. The top 10 countries currently for registrations are (in order) the U.S., U.K., China, India, Spain, Germany, Mexico, Italy, Brazil and France.

Advertising: Polo Bluemotion

Green Thing

Green thing

The dangers of environmental publicity - Nike takes a hit

A sceptical article from BusinessWeek on the carbon-cutting claims of big corporates.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_44/b4056003.htm

Listen in...

BusinessWeek’s John Byrne and Ben Elgin on what made leading corporate sustainability advocate Auden Schendler change his tune about the profitability of environmentally friendly companies

http://www.businessweek.com/mediacenter/qt/podcasts/cover_stories/covercast_10_18_07.mp3

Green product lifecycle

http://feeds.treehugger.com/~r/treehuggersite/~3/175153957/7_steps_in_the.php

The report

http://www.unep.org/geo/geo4/media/index.asp

The UN criticeses global governments

The UN Environment Programme, UNEP, has released a study which reveals, contrary to all expectations, that governments are not taking the environmental crisis seriously enough (note my irony).

 

But governments have already been hit by the facts. What will it take to force them to act?

Guardian launches 'Tread Lightly'

Tread Lightly is a programme for those who want to resuce their environmental impact, but don't know how. If you sign up, you'll be led through the process in a series of weekly steps.

 

This week's pledge is to replace lightbulbs with energy-efficient alternatives. 18 people have signed up at point of writing this, and the savings which they will generate are shown on the website.

 

The pledges are released each Friday, hopefulyl to make more productive use of our lazy weekends... Where did those go, by the way? I wonder what the emissions reductions would be if we all stayed home and stopped running feverishly around the town/country/globe trying to pack in a week's worth of activities?...

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/treadlightly

Notice Nature Noticed.

An Irish environmental campaign, 'Notice Nature', has won a European award for best practice in communicating environmental issues.

 

Have a look at: http://www.noticenature.ie/

 

 

The Greenery hits it off...

...with over 100 visits to date! Thanks guys!

 

 

Keep it clean

Springwise have posted about a rather fun new idea. Have a look at the newest way to take marketing to the streets...

 

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/springwise/~3/174506739/

Fuelling the dilemma.

Greenpeace have released an article criticising the implementation of the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation, a programme which will require 2.5% of all fuel supplied to come from biofuels by April 2008.

According to campaigners, no standards have been put in place to ensure biofuels used are produced in an environmentally-sound manner.

See the full release at: http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/media/press-releases/government-introduces-uk-biofuel-obligations-without-proper-safeguards-20071024

Consumption continues

Goverment environmental efforts have reached another impasse today. A pay-as-you-throw tax, on un-recycled rubbish, has been delayed indefinitely.

 

 

Lunch-hour reading

Check out this article from today's Guardian arguing that the Soil Association should refuse an organic label to air-freighted foods

http://www.guardian.co.uk/leaders/story/0,,2198381,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=environment

GE investment rises

GE has announced that it will invest more than $1 billion on cleaner technology research and development (R&D) for 2007, drawing closer to its pledge to invest $1.5 billion annually on ecomagination R&D by 2010.

 

EAC announcement of the day...

The EAC will be hearing evidence on the subject "Are Biofuels Sustainable", on the 13th of November.  Attendees include:

Biofuels Corporation

Environmental Industries Commission

Friends of the Earth

WWF Scotland

The Committee normally meets in a committee room at Westminster. These sessions are open to the public on a first come, first served basis.

Attention Londoners!

Now is your moment: this Friday is the last day for Londoners to take part in a consultation as to whether to introduce a city-wide levy / ban on throwaway shopping bags.

Info on the consultation
Submit your response

Apparently, us Brits get through 8 billion of the things a year. However, although they dont biodegrade well, they use less energy in the production phase than paper bags.

The EAC's been busy!

"The structure and operation of Government and the challenge of Climate Change" will be published by the Environment Audit Committee on Monday the 29th of October

Their website: www.parliament.uk/eacom

 

New EAC evidence session

The environmental audit committee will be speaking to the following organisations next Tuesday regarding the Climate Change Levy.

 

The Carbon Trust

University of Plymouth

Policy Studies Institute

The Committee normally meets in a committee room at Westminster. These sessions are open to the public on a first come, first served basis.

Reduce your mail's carbon footprint

By using Viapost! Type up your letter, email it to Viapost, and they'll do the folding, addressing, and hunt down the stamp all on your behalf. The real beauty of it is, this all happens at the closest viapost centre to the delivery address, thus saving cross-country transport (unless the addressee lives just down the road, that is.)

 

No more need you rake in the bottom of your wallet for that elusive last stamp you know you bought three months ago...

 

Viapost: http://www.viapost.com/

A resource-friendly bathroom break from ING

If only it were this simple! ING has launched a surreal new digital campaign, where you can take your 'toilet break' online - no need to even leave the monitor!

Slightly crude, but low on loo roll consumption, at least!

Environmental charities

According to The Guardian, environmental charities are finding it hard to come by funding. (http://society.guardian.co.uk/voluntary/story/0,,2197408,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=environment)

 

I wonder if this is because, much like healthcare (who wants to give charitably to the NHS?) we see this as important enough for the govt to be tackling and using our taxes to do so. It's not a nice, touchy-feely add on, so why shouldn't it be a govt financial priority?

Government cops out.

Malcolm Wicks, the enrgy minister, has confirmed the reduction in the UK's renewable targets from 20 to 15% by 2020. Apparently, it's only one means to an end, which can be accomplished by other measures.

 

Which other measures, Mr Wicks?

 

Yes, it's expensive. Yes, it's not easy, but we do have a fairly big problem on our hands, and we're already behind most of the rest of Europe. Sigh.

 

 

ReGeneration

Dell's offering good old-fashioned cash, man's favourite motivator, in exchange for green design ideas.

Have a look:

http://www.dell.com/content/topics/topic.aspx/global/shared/corp/environment/en/re_green_contest_popup?c=us&l=en&s=corp 

Green giveaway!

Has Christmas come early? No, but Siansbury's will be giving away 1 million low-energy lightbulbs on Saturday.

 

Has anyone invented low-energy christmas lights yet?

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/22/energyefficiency.consumeraffairs?gusrc=rss&feed=environment

Climate research: it's looking gloomier than we thought.

The Global Carbon Project have released research suggesting global warming may be occuring faster than we think.

 

Their press release:

 

Carbon sink slowdown contributing to rapid growth in atmospheric CO₂

 

There has been a decline in the efficiency of natural land and ocean sinks which soak up carbon dioxide (CO₂) emitted to the atmosphere by human activities, according to findings published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the US (PNAS).

 

The swift increase in atmospheric CO₂ is due to faster economic growth coupled with a halt in carbon intensity reductions, in addition to natural sinks removing a smaller proportion of emissions from the air. Carbon intensity is the amount of carbon emitted to produce one dollar of global wealth.

 

The study’s lead author, Dr Pep Canadell, executive director of the Global Carbon Project, explained “Fifty years ago, for every tonne of CO₂ emitted, 600kg were removed by natural sinks. In 2006 only 550kg were removed per tonne and that amount is falling.”

 

“In addition to the growth of global population and wealth, we now know that significant contributions to the growth of atmospheric CO₂ arise from the slow down of natural sinks and the halt to improvements in carbon intensity.”

 

The rise in growth in atmospheric CO₂ is generating climate forcings that are bigger and sooner than expected. By altering the global energy balance, these mechanisms "force" the climate to change.

 

“There are regional differences in the efficiency of natural sinks. Half of decline in the efficiency of the ocean sink is due to the intensification and poleward movement of the westerly winds in the Southern ocean”, said contributing author Corinne Le Quere of the University of East Anglia.

 

“The proportion of carbon dioxide remaining in the atmosphere after vegetation and the oceans absorb what they can has escalated over the past 50 years, showing a decrease in the planet’s ability to absorb anthropogenic emissions.” said Dr Canadell.

 

Dr Raupach, co-chair of the Global Carbon Project, said ”We have found that the earth is losing its restorative capacity to absorb CO₂ emissions in the face of the massive increases in emissions over the last half century.  The longer we delay reducing emissions, the more restorative capacity will be lost."

 

The majority of these authors are members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which was recently awarded the Nobel Peace Prize 2007.

Those poor folks at M&S.

The research just keeps on coming!

 

The Local Govt Association has just released a report on supermarket packaging, informing us that up to 40% of packaging in our supermarkets is non-recyclable. M&S, which isn't fairing well in surveys at the moment, was bottom of the table, with only 60% of its packaging qualifying as recyclable. Asda grabbed the leadership position, with 70% of its packaging being recyclable.

 

An M&S spokesman starred on BBC news this morning, making quite sensible comments about the need to protect food during transport, and the targets the company had set itself. A nice, no-excuses, approach, but it makes me wonder if many corporates need to take a closer look at their targets and start talking about more immediate measures and actions instead. That might stop us all getting just a bit sceptical.

 

The govt springs a leak...

According to The Guardian's John Vidal, "Ministers are planning a U-turn on Britain's pledges to combat climate change that "effectively abolishes" its targets to rapidly expand the use of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power."

 

Have a look at the article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/23/renewableenergy.energy

 

Apparently, reaching our 20% reduction target by 2020 will involve "severe practical difficulties".

Surprising, that. Nothing easy is worth doing, Mr Brown!

The govt on emissions trading.

The govt has published its response to the Environmental Audit Committee (eac)'s report on the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.

Their response includes commentary on, amongst other things, emissions reduction targets, the impact of restrictions on the aviation sector, and effective use of the cap and trade system. Have a look here:

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmenvaud/1072/107206.htm

 

E.ON make green easy.

Today E.ON launched EasyGreen - a new green energy product for businesses which offers 100% renewable electricity.

 

According to E.ON, EasyGreen provides businesses with renewable and offset electricity solely from wind farms and hydro power stations, with a Climate Change Levy Exemption certificate, and is available to large and small companies' alike

In addition, E.ON will offset the carbon emissions generated from the electricity used through a partnership with Climate Care.

Of course, the tariff is subject to availability. I know several major corporates have had difficulties in the past sourcing green electricity - I wonder just how much e.on will provide? I'm also intrigued about the offset issue- surely that's the point of green energy - you don't have to offset! Anyone want to help me out on that one? I think I'm being slow...

From FutureLab...

Interesting post on TNT's green strategy:

 

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Futurelab/~3/172979859/the_margin_challenge_of_being.html

 

 

Silverjet prove it's not all about green.

They may be carbon neutral, but their latest ad says they have more interesting things to shout about.

 

http://www.visit4info.com/details.cfm?adid=51358

Love this advert!

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oMl9DOA_Dzg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oMl9DOA_Dzg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

 

 

News from Treehugger...

Treehugger picked up on an article in the Times this week about warnings on emissions in car ads... Have a look at: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/10/carbon_health_w.php

A green Christmas?

Consumerist heaven or environmental nightmare? Interesting article in today's Guardian about an exchange website helping people towards a more eco-friendly Christmas. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/21/recycling?gusrc=rss&feed=environment).

 

I'd anticipate this is the first of many - but are we ready to accept recycled gifts? It'd certainly take the hassle out of last-minute shopping, and I'm probably not the only person to have gladly given a difficult relative a cow (http://www.sendacow.org.uk/) rather than spend hours shopping for something they'll hate.

 

Interesting idea, but it's a shame the impact isn't more directly measurable. One charity I'm a big fan of is Plan - you sponsor a kid and then get regular contact from them, so you actually feel the results of your sponsorship. On a larger scale, rather than individual cow-contributions, wouldn't it be great if you could put a family or town on your Christmas list, thereby making a bigger and more obvious impact? It would certainly feel a little less like offsetting...

 

 

 

Air freighted food to lose organic labelling?

According to The Guardian, the government will today urge the Soil Association not to strip air-freighted organic fruit and vegetables of their valuable certification on environmental grounds. Their final decision will be unveiled on Wednesday. Apparently, both a full and selectvie ban (in which only those products bringing signiicant social and developmental benefit to the communities in which they are grown) are being opposed.

It seems to me that we're confusing two seperate issues here. Surely people eat organic (and I may be wrong) to avoid consuming the chemicals used in ordinary food production. Albeit they may also be concerned with the effect of these chemicals on the environment, I don't think we can necessarily logically extend that objection to freight emissions. To keep labelling truly transparent, this needs to be seperately indicated.

Guardian coverage at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/22/organic?gusrc=rss&feed=environment

Volkswagen Bluemotion advert

BT holds on to its leadership position...

... announcing today plans to develop wind farms aimed at generating up to 25 per cent of its existing UK electricity requirements by 2016. 

 

The wind farm scheme represents the UK's biggest corporate wind power project outside of the energy sector. Rather surprisingly, BT is actually one of Britain’s biggest consumers of electricity, with an annual requirement of around 0.7 per cent of the UK’s entire consumption. 

 

It's nice to see someone taking action rather than just talking about the issues.

 

 

Next target...shipping

Forget aviation, the new criminal of the year is the shippnig industry. A report from Intertanko (isn't that a fantastic name?) claims that global shipping emissions are twice that of aviation.

 

Presumably, however, emissions are lower when directly compared to an identical journey.

 

Maybe we need a ship-freighted label to accompany our air freighted one.

 

Incidentally, my mother (like all mothers, a source of great wisdom) yesterday commented on the recent chicken-spillage in Scotland.Why, she rightly queried, were the chickens being transported so far cross country, when presumably there is as much a market for a good roast dinner in their home area? How much of our livestock is trekked across the country unnecessarily, when a good local market/supermarket could easily be found?

Shell makes a statement

James Smith, UK Chairman of Shell, has authored an article in the BBC's 'Gren Room' today

Smith draws attention to what he sees as a number of 'hard truths':

• acceleration of global energy demand
• fossil fuels will continue to be the main source of energy for decades to come
• production of "easy oil" (oil and gas that are relatively easy to extract) will not keep pace with the growing demand
• carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are set to rise even faster than demand for energy

He urges governments to urgently provide policies that encourage investment in new technologies and energy conservation, and comments that "a good way to put a price on CO2 and to force reductions is to implement a "cap-and-trade" system."

 

Not exactly a revolutionary statement there.

 

He goes on to clarify Shell's role:

 

Companies like Shell must work to make a diversified mix on energy sources fit for the world's purpose. That purpose is enough energy to support economies while avoiding the damage of climate change.

That is why Shell has such a broad range of technology developments, from clean coal, to making oil sands less carbon intensive, to later generation biofuels that make biofuel from crop waste, to wind, to thin film solar and to hydrogen.

 

Shell apparently have the broadest alternative energy portfolio of any major energy company, having established renewable energy as their fifth core business in 1997. However, in an article on June this year in the GUardian, Greenpeace (always good for an opposing pr angle) pointed out that global energy investment was in the region of $1 trillion a year and that BP and Shell spent 5% or less of their money on supporting renewables and 95% on oil and gas schemes.

 

As ever, the truth is probably somewhere between the two. Shell should be applauded for making moves towards bringing renewables further into the mainstream. However, I still feel that the nature of their core business prevents them from being a true and credible leader in the sector.

 

 

 

Yet more research.

A new report from the Energy Saving Trust gives us yet another consumer segmentation for all matters green. It's been released in advance of national Energy Saving Week (next week), and they've got all formulaic about it. Apparently, it measures an individual's awareness and information on climate change (AI) and energy saving issues, and compares it with their response in terms of their degree of engagement and action (EA) (I=AI + EA). (???????) Women are leading the way, as they make up over half (53%) of the most influential group ('Community Changers')

 

The segmentation:

Community Changers - (38% of UK population)

The biggest and most influential group, couples dominate the Community Changers, who are vocal about their opinions and back up their views with action. They believe they're knowledgeable about climate change and energy saving and turn to many sources for advice and information on these issues. As part of extensive communities, including international and online communities, this is the group who initiate the most conversations about climate change and these are potentially the people with the power to do most to help fight climate change.

Armchair Advocates (20% of UK population)

Married men lead this group, which claims to be very knowledgeable about climate change and energy saving. Often, however, this knowledge is not backed up with action. Group members tend to view their core social network and experts or authorities as the most trusted sources of information.

Tea-Time Solvers - (17% of UK population)

Often women aged between 35 and 54 and most likely of all groups to have children, tea-time solvers feel guilty about not saving energy and admit to not knowing a lot about climate change. When looking for information on these issues though, the group makes use of a wide circle of influence, consulting everyone from neighbours to radio programmes in their quest for knowledge.

Self-contained singles - (25% of UK population)

Predominantly aged between 18 and 44, and the most likely of all groups to be single, this group still has room to learn more about energy saving. Moving within select communities, they only regard a small circle, mainly made up of friends and family, as trusted advisors.

Once again, us singles get a bashing. Sigh.

Oh, and why haven't the EST got this release on their site? Had to get it off PR newswire. Seriously remiss of them, methinks.

I look forward to seeing the actual report, when I can find it. links welcome.

 

Tesco take to the high seas

Or rather the canals. Today they announced that they'll be using the Manchester ship canal to freight wine. Sainsbury's have also been talking about such a scheme recently, but Tesco's have beaten them to it.

 

Apparently, it'll take 50 lorries off the road each week.

 

Just watch out for pirates.

 

Full release: http://www.tescocorporate.com/page.aspx?pointerid=870D3670DCA549D9A17880B5CA48FDC7

 

 

Greenpeace names and shames forest outlaws

Greenpeace has released a couple of reports today which reflect fairly poorly on our favourite corporates. They've been looking into our tissues (no joke) and have identified which companies are most forest-friendly in their production of tissue-based products.

 

The victors:

M&S and Sainsbury's

 

The villains:

Somerfield, Boots, and Kimberley Clark (ditch that Andrex, folks!)

 

The report measures the proportion of FSC certified material used in production.

 

Apparently, Proctor and Gamble refused to report. So got an F.

 

Arguing about Cod.

Responding to new research from the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) which suggests that North Sea cod stocks are beginning to recover, Oliver Knowles, oceans campaigner at Greenpeace said:

"It would a disaster for North Sea cod if the fishing industry took this news as an excuse to return to the devastating fishing levels we've seen in the past. In order to protect cod stocks for the long term, politicians need to act with the greatest possible caution on this new advice."

-Greenpeace press release

Wouldn't suggest putting it back on the menu any time soon guys.

Blog Action Day - it's a wrap

It was, you hopefully noticed, Blog Action Day on Monday. Well, the stats from the day are now online at http://blogactionday.org/. Highlights included:

20,603 Blog Participated

23,327 Blog Posts

14,631,038 RSS Readers

Impressive!

A visit to parliament, anyone?

The environmental audit committee will be hearing evidence on Tuesday (23rd) on the role of the climate change levy. Companies concerned include:

 

The Association for the Conservation of Energy

EDF Energy

The Combined Heat and Power Association

AEA Energy and Environment

 

It's a public meeting, and they're always quite interesting if you have the time to go along. Though those benches do get a bit sore after a while, so I'd take a cushion. :)

The Government response to the emissions trading report...

will be published at 11.00am on Monday 22 October 2007. I'm more excited than I sound. :)

Standard Chartered add to the confusion

I've just come across a rather baffling press release from Standard Chartered (sorry if their pr gurus are reading this). They run/sponsor/are in some way involved with The Greatest Race on Earth (so great it has so far passed me by). To this, an 'environmental challenge' has now been added. The bank will be donating $1 million to WWF UK to support vital environmental conservation projects which will benefit the three nations that attract the highest number of environmental pledges per capita.

 

To pledge, you need to go to their website and check a box to say what you'll do (reuse plastic bags three times a week, or take 1 min less in the shower, amongst other options).

 

Green gimmickry, anyone? if you won't do it to save the planet, save money, or save face, would this make you?

 

See The Green Thing (www.dothegreenthing.com) for a more impressive interactive campaign.

 

Another site for your del.icio.us account.

A new website called BusinessGreen has just launched, so I thought I'd toddle over there and have a look. And it's rather good! Firstly, it's blessedly UK focused (sorry to any antipodean/US/anywhere else readers out there). News is detailed and organised so you can find relevant sectors easily, and they've got some great commentators including Peter Ainsworth.

 

And yes, they're multimedia. Who isn't these days?

 

Go have a look!

 

http://www.businessgreen.com/

It must be official survey day...

... because the Climate Group have also launched a report on consumer brands, the 'Climate Brand Index'. This new creation claims to track year-on-year consumer perceptions of how brands are performing on climate change.

 

Interestingly, the index pretty much turns the findings of this morning's report on their head. The top five companies are as follows:

 

1. Tesco
2. BP
3. The Co-operative
4. M&S
5. Sainsbury’s

 

Note how both Tesco and The Co-op have overtaken M&S (still my fave), whilst Waitrose is nowhere to be seen! However, this report is based on consumer perception rather than meeting criteria. I'm still surprised, based on what I presumed was a high awareness of the M&S campaign, that it isn't above Tesco - however, presumably there are more Tesco than M&S shoppers out there, a nice captive market for Tesco's messaging.

 

The report includes some interesting analysis of consumer attitudes:

 

The research shows that still nearly a third of consumers have not been won over by the need to take action around climate change.  Two ‘tribes’ dominate this group: the ‘unwilling’ (12%) who are accepting of the issue, but not prepared to act, and the ‘rejecters’ (16%) who confidently reject the issue feeling informed enough to do so.

 

There's loads more detail in the actual report, so go have a look:

 

http://theclimategroup.org/assets/resources/Climate_Change_UK_07.pdf

Greener grocers

The National consumer Council's report on supermarkets' environmental performance was released today, and has seen M&S and Sainsbury's join Waitrose as the highest performers, achieving a 'B' ranking. 

The scale:

A=excellent

B=good

C=showing potential

D=room for improvement

E=poor 

The ratings:

Waitrose, Marks and Spencer, Sainsbury's = B

Asda, Tesco =C Co-op, 

Morrisons, Somerfield = D 

The ratings system looks at four areas: reducing CO2 emissions, action on waste, sustainable fish and sustainable farming. i was, I must confess, surprised to find Co-op so low on the scale. Apparently, they fall down on sustainable fish and farming. Marks and Spencers perform poorly on UK in-season produce (interestingly, Somerfield scored highest for this), and energy-saving lightbulbs. Does this last one really deserve to play such a large role in the survey? I wonder where initiatives such as the new M&S eco-stores come in? (Yes, M&S have won me over with their marketing - how could they not be coming top of everything???0What such a report does make me consider is the effectiveness of a 'tick box' comparison of enterprises which are dealing with this issue in very different but inventive ways. Equally, it suggests the hygiene measures for supermarkets may be higher than they currently assume. Should uk produce and energy efficient lightbulbs just be a given?Hope fully we'll see a few 'A's next year. 

A sideline: apparently, the food we eat is responsible for 31 per cent of the average European household’s impact on climate change. Hmmm....

Tired of the real world? Then green your own city!

I've just heard that BP and Electronic Arts (EA) are collaborating to incorporate climate educationg within SimCity Societies (out Nov 15)! Apparently, players will be able to choose between low-carbon technologies and monitor the emissions produced by their cities. If players choose high-carbon technologies, emissions will reach critical levels and natural disasters will become more frequent.

 

Steve Seabolt at EA comments:

 

With SimCity Societies, we have the opportunity not only to demonstrate some of the causes and effects of global warming, but also to educate players how seemingly small choices can have a big global impact

 

Who said computer games weren't educational?

 

 

npower get their maths wrong...

Poor npower. In a perfect illustration of the dangers of green marketing, they've got their figures mixed up. Interestingly, this fact was highlighted by an anti-wind farm group. Ulterior motive, anyone?

 

The Guardian cover this in full:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/10/windpower.energy

Are you in need of a carectomy?...

...then have a look at this great new initiative from EcoGeek

 

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1039/

The Pre-budget report

Yesterday, the Chancellor announced several measures to tackle climate change in his pre-budegt report.

The creation of an Environmental Transformation Fund of £1.2 billion (to support the demonstration and deployment of new energy and efficiency technologies in the UK and to advance poverty reduction through environmental protection in developing countries) could be positive news for the rising numbers of cleantech companies.

Darling also announced the intention to replace air passenger duty with a duty payable per plane rather than per passenger, from 1 November 2009. Apparently, it will also be distance-linked. Hopefully, this means airlines are less likely to fly half-empty planes. Presumably it also applies to freight?

Reactions from the airlines have been mixed, with the predictably irate rant from Ryanair...

Look out for: publication of the interim report of the King Review on vehicle and fuel technologies which over the next 25 years could help ‘decarbonise’ road transport.

Have a look at the BBC for more info:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7034372.stm

Too much travelling.

It turns out, according to a TGI survey mentioned today in The Guardian, that the UK's emissions from air travel are higher, per capita, than those of any other country.
So who are we blaming? The proliferation of low cost airlines is shouldering a big proportion of the blame.
But what about consumers? The sad truth seems to be, once again, that we want companies to baby-sit us and make our decisions for us. Equally, however, I should imagine there'd be uproar if airlines doubled prices on environmental grounds.
Unfortunately, in the adult world, there's no-one to turn the lights on and make the monsters under the bed go away. The question for marketers is how much responsibility our clients need to take for their customers' actions.

The Guardian on the CDP

Terry Macalister (no relation) has just published an article about the CDP report on the Guardian website. He makes two particularly interesting points.

1) more companies than ever are asking that their disclosure not be made public - unless you're a green crusader, maybe companies feel it's safest at the moment to get on with things quietly and avoid potential pitfalls.

2) Macalister comments on the lack of information on indirect emissions. Once supply chain becomes the real focus, life should get interesting.

Some excerpts. The first illustrates some of the problems with actively promoting your green creds:

A report in June by the Advertising Standards Authority says it's a "growing trend" for complaints to be made by the public - and upheld by the agency - against companies making unsubstantiated claims.

...

Here in the UK, although response rates among FTSE350 companies to today's CDP survey were up from 49% in 2006 to 70% this year, there was also an increase in the number of respondents who did not want their disclosure made public. In addition, there was only the most microscopic response from any firms on "indirect" greenhouse gas emissions which is unfortunately optional under the current project rules.

...

Another issue that clearly must be tackled is the desperate need for establishing common standards on what constitutes a carbon footprint. Few companies have truly credible reporting systems in place and carbon emissions need to be measured, accounted for and reported in a way that everyone must adhere to.

Full article: http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/2007/10/there_is_little_doubt_that.html

Go the French!

French supermarket, Casino, has announced it's going to start a system of environmental labelling on its products. However, it's going a step beyond walkers and tesco, and giving concerned consumers info on packaging weight, waste generated, and distance travelled.

 

Noble idea - but perhaps a case of too much information? How do we choose between products, unless one scores higher in all three areas? Formulas and calculators on each trolley?

 

Consumers want information - that much is true. But they also need their decisions to be made easier. I'm not sure this will fulfil that second need.

 

Thoughts?

 

Thanks to Ogilvy for the heads up on this one...

http://blog.futurelab.net/

Advertising on t'interweb?

Lacking inspiration? Then take a look at how some leading not-for-profits have used the digital world to further their causes. Apart from the fact that I just love the ferret shelter concept (???????), there are some good, and some fairly standard, ideas on here. A great chance to see where the competition is at.

 

http://www.squidoo.com/org20/

Google's Granting Wishes...

Thinking of doing some pro-bono work? Great! We knew you were. Well why not direct your client towards Google Grants? Those marevllous folk over at Treehugger mentioned today that they provide free advertising space to not-for-profit organisations.

Each organization awarded a Google Grant receives at least three months of advertising.

Happily for us Google users, political organisations need not apply (I see enough of good old Gordon's face in the media as it is). With the further exception of religious groups, all others can give it a go!

So, why not make it your lunch-break project to think about who might be worthy of your services, and a bit of free time?

Carbon Disclosure Possibilities?

The fifth survey of business by the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) has generated the highest response rate yet - 77% of the FTSE 500 honouring it with a response. Well worth tracking down any clients you may have lurking in there.
So what does it tell us? Well, key highlights include:

"95% of companies that consider climate change to present a commercial risk have implemented a greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction program with a specific target and timeline."

The other 5% obviously have an interesting approach to risk...

"Climate change is viewed as a strategic issue by both carbon-intensive and low-carbon companies."

That would suggest maybe marketeers should start thinking about their own agencies...

"Carbon-intensive sectors had an average response rate of 75% compared to low-carbon sectors which had an average response rate of 69%."

Low-carbon doesn't mean no-carbon! Is there still, therefore, real leadership opportunity in the low-carbon sectors?

Not only are more companies acknowledging and reporting their emissions as a potential risk, but many are also acknowledging the commercial opportunities which the issue presents. I guess we've only seen the beginning of the 'greenrush' to produce new products and services. Equally, however, carbon accounting and response quality has apparently improved, so maybe we'll see products which are more verifiably green.... we can but hope.

All in all, not a bad year!

The Green Thing

Ok, it's a fairly poor show to begin a blog with a plug for someone else's site, but hey, I'm working up to something original.

So, I'm sending you all (oh marvellous and non-existent readership) to http://www.dothegreenthing.com . This is an amazing example of how interactive media makes boring things fun. Like walking to work, which is the first green challenge set. Doing it earns you a little green monster to add to your collection of 'green things', which you can apparently add to your facebook page.

Much more fun than a carbon calculator.