Buildings that use less energy, contain fewer toxins, use recycled materials and are healthier for their users are certified by the USGBC’s LEED rating. Computers that do the same, as of 2006, are certified by EPEAT (short for the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool). The EPEAT system includes 51 environmental performance criteria, a registry listing certified products, and a verification system for vetting producer claims.
EPEAT reports that the cumulative environmental effect of the 109 million certified laptops, desktops and monitors sold in 2007 alone will:
- Reduce use of primary (virgin) materials by 75.5 million metric tons, equivalent to the weight of more than 585 million refrigerators
- Reduce use of toxic materials, including mercury, by 3220 metric tons, equivalent to the weight of 1.6 million bricks
- Eliminate use of enough mercury to fill 482,381 household fever thermometers (as mercury is highly potent neurotoxin in minute amounts, this is significant)
- Avoid the disposal of 124,000 metric tons of hazardous waste, equivalent to the weight of 62 million bricks.
Because of the energy efficiency requirements for EPEAT certification, the 2007 sales will result in:
- Savings of 42.2 billion kWh of electricity - enough to power 3.7 million US homes for a year
- Elimination of the release of 174 million metric tons of air emissions (including GHGs) and almost 365 thousand metric tons of water pollutant emissions
- Reduction of 3.31 million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE) greenhouse gas emission - equivalent to removing over 2.6 million U.S. cars from the road for a year.
Contrary to the reality that green products come at a premium (think organic produce or organic cotton t-shirts), energy- (and water-) efficient products often save money by consuming less energy (or water) over their lifetimes. In fact, EPEAT conservatively estimates that certified units will save $3.66 billion (US) in life cycle costs for this reason. When the reduced need for toxics mitigation and disposal are factored in - costs often borne by the public - the savings are likely to be even greater.
It is often only when consumers ask for healthier, more efficient products, that manufacturers invest in he redesign process. Today nearly all computer manufacturers offer an EPEAT certified model, including Apple, Dell, HP, Lenovo, LG, NEC Philips, Samsung, Sony, Toshiba, and others. In the 18 months since its launch EPEAT had made a significant market impact: today nearly 23 percent of worldwide total sales of desktops and laptops are EPEAT registered.
Fun Fact: Like the building industry’s LEED rating, EPEAT comes in 3 flavors, or tiers:
- Bronze - product meets required criteria only
- Silver - product meets required criteria and at least 50% of optional criteria
- Gold - product meets all required criteria and at least 75% of optional criteria
For procurement officials: EPEAT’s webpage for purchasers includes model contract language and a benefits calculator.
I’ve always been fascinated by things like door knobs, plastic pens, toasters…There must be a million ways to design all of these things, and yet, how did each thing come to look exactly like that? A ridge here, a notch there, an ergonomically placed groove: in design, each detail is a conscious decision. For this reason, design is fascinating because it is truly a physical manifestation of our intentions for how we will live with each other as humans and within our ecosystems. Whether it is a simple, inconspicuous object or a city or building, design tells a story of intention through creation.
In 2005, Bic produced their 100 billionth disposable plastic pen – the ubiquitous white barrel. Lined up end-to-end these pens would go to the moon and back 40 times! What were the designers intending when they designed this pen? We know that disposability was designed in, which is an indication of the perceived the waste absorbing capacity of the earth at the time. Frugality was also an intention, and using plastic allowed them to achieve that. Would Bic have chosen plastic if they had foreseen 100,000,000,000 used and discarded, or if they had known that plastic never biodegrades, or that in the year 2008 there would be an island of plastic in the ocean the size of Texas? Sometimes there may be unintended side effects to our design, but side effects are still effects.
Designers are only human, and our capacity for systems thinking and taking a long view is limited. So given this, how can we design elegantly, like nature, and in a way that reflects the best of intentions for humanity and the global ecosystem? Perhaps good starting point is learning from the time-tested design principles found in nature, which would maximize performance, use shape to minimize material, reduce toxins and eliminate waste through Biomimicry.
I am taking a Sustainable Products and Services class this semester and one of the questions I will be asking is, “How is this responsibility recognized by designers today, and how can designers be empowered to leave their creative legacies with elegant, well-intentioned designs?” Any thoughts?
Since we’re now eleven months and counting from what will be a major presidential election of our lifetimes, and less than one month until the Iowa and New Hampshire caucuses and primaries, it’s time to take a look at where the candidates stand on climate policy. The world is waiting for the United States to take a clear stand on climate issues. As 1/20th of the world’s population, and producers of 1/5th of the world’s CO2 equivalent, we must behave as responsible world citizens. Choosing a president is only one of many decisions with which we’ll be faced, and we should not wait for a new Administration to seriously address this issue - but we should understand the implications of our choice by asking tough questions and demanding honest answers and innovative solutions. The following is reprinted from Planet Ark:
WASHINGTON - Here’s what leading US presidential candidates have said about climate change, and what they want to do about it.
DEMOCRATIC NEW YORK SEN. HILLARY CLINTON: “We need to start on a path to slow, stop and reverse the growth of greenhouse gas emissions.” Supports an 80 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2050, 40 mile-per-gallon fuel efficiency standard by 2017 and 10 percent cut in energy consumption by 2020.
FORMER DEMOCRATIC SOUTH CAROLINA SEN. JOHN EDWARDS: “We need investments in renewable energy — more efficient cars and trucks — and a national cap on carbon emissions.” Supports at least 80 percent cut in carbon emissions by 2050, 55 mile-per-gallon fuel efficiency standard by 2030, 20 percent reduction in energy consumption by 2020.
FORMER REPUBLICAN NEW YORK MAYOR RUDY GIULIANI: “Climate change is real. It’s happening. I believe human beings are contributing to it.” No articulated position on carbon caps, fuel efficiency or energy use, but said he believes best way to deal with problem is through energy independence.
FORMER REPUBLICAN ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: “It’s a spiritual issue. (The Earth) belongs to God. I have no right to destroy it.” Backs an unspecified cap on carbon emissions and 35 mile-per-gallon fuel efficiency standard by 2020; favors alternative energy and energy independence.
REPUBLICAN ARIZONA SEN. JOHN MCCAIN: “I know that climate change is real … we’ve got to address it, we can do it with technology, with cap and trade, with capitalist and free enterprise motivation.” Co-authored bill to cut emissions by 65 percent by 2050, favors unspecified fuel efficiency increase and overall energy efficiency.
DEMOCRATIC ILLINOIS SEN. BARACK OBAMA: “For the sake of our security, our economy, our jobs and our planet, the age of oil must end in our time.” Supports 80 percent cut in carbon emissions by 2050, 50 mile-per-gallon fuel efficiency standard in 18 years and 50 percent cut in energy intensity — the amount of power used as it relates to economic growth product — by 2030.
FORMER REPUBLICAN MASSACHUSETTS GOV. MITT ROMNEY: “Is global warming an issue for the world? Absolutely. Is it something we can deal with by becoming energy independent and energy secure? We sure can.” Willing to consider carbon cap if it’s enacted globally, opposes fuel efficiency standards as a stand-alone measure but generally supports fuel efficiency. (Reporting by Deborah Zabarenko, editing by Doina Chiacu)
At a Manhattan eco-festival this past July, those who signed up to receive energy from a wind farm drank free beer from the Brooklyn Brewery, which itself is powered by wind. “It’s a fun, easy incentive” to switch to clean energy, said Chris Neidl, who came up with the idea. “And it chips away at the holier-than-thou reputation of the environmental movement.”* That’s right - we love our organic, biodynamic wines, but the sustainability crowd is not above cold, refreshing beer from time to time. In fact, one of our favorite beverages is Fat Tire by New Belgium, out of Fort Collins, CO. A model green brewery, the extremely efficient New Belgium facilities are powered by wind (a decision the employee owners decided on back in 1998) and reduce energy, water and materials consumption by:
- utilizing natural daylight instead of artificial lighting
- installing motion sensors for areas that need artificial lighting
- reusing heat
- water recapture and reuse
- using spent grain for cattle feed
- using cool winter air to chill their coolers
- purchasing recycled content office supplies and furniture
GreenBiz reports today on two other breweries taking steps to reduce their ecological footprints. The Colorado mega-brewer Coors, famous for “Tapping the Rockies” will tap a little less of nature’s capacity to absorb CO2, as they reduce their emissions by 12% tied to production, by 2010.
Local-scale Peak Brewing out of Maine, will begin delivering its beer using the Manhattan Beer Distributors 30 compressed natural gas (CNG) powered vehicles, reducing emissions by 227 tons in the coming years.
And of course, the environmental footprint of any local brew will be less than beer that has traveled far and wide to end up in your chilled pint glass. (Don’t forget to ask your local pub to recycle the glass bottles if they aren’t already doing so!)
Also: Go enjoy a green beer and meet some new greeniacs at your local Green Drinks. Click here to find out if there’s a Green Drinks in your town.
*From the NYTimes here.
While you’re out celebrating and a-wassailing for the holidays, raise a toast to these 12 environmental successes of 2007, compiled by Environmental Defense. Then get ready to gear back up - there’s still lots of work to be done in 2008!
The bald eagle is back
2007 may be remembered as the year of the eagle - the American bald eagle to be more precise.
Just before the July 4th holiday, Environmental Defense joined Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne for the historic announcement that the American bald eagle had officially recovered and was being removed from the threatened and endangered species list.
Bald eagles were once down to just 417 nesting pairs. But, our work to ban the use of DDT a generation ago combined with decades of implementing Endangered Species Act recovery management practices helped restore America’s national symbol and one of nature’s most majestic creatures.
Better permits, better markets for fishermen
Morro Bay in California’s central coast is home to one of the richest assemblages of marine life in the world. But destructive trawl fishing has threatened this important ocean ecosystem.
Environmental Defense worked with The Nature Conservancy and Morro Bay fishermen to come up with fishing practices that don’t harm the environment. Together, we persuaded the Pacific Fishery Management Council to allow fishermen to lease trawl permits while using sustainable gear like hooks and traps, instead of trawls which are of the most damaging kinds of fishing gear. We also helped Morro Bay fishermen develop markets for seafood caught in sustainable ways.
Why are giant corporations like Ford Motor Company, Johnson & Johnson, and Xerox calling on the US Federal government to “quickly enact strong national legislation to require significant reductions of greenhouse gas emissions”? Because as members of the US Climate Action Partnership, they believe that addressing the “climate change challenge will create more economic opportunities than risks for the U.S. economy.”
They’ve also caught on the fact that joining the conversation early puts you in a position to help draft the regulations you’ll need to meet. Being proactive puts you at an advantage to meeting or beating regulations before enforcement goes into effect, so as competitors scramble to comply, you’re sitting pretty, and finding other ways to increase your competitive advantage. Lastly, having a single, across-the-board set of regulations to follow eliminates the complexity of meeting various and sundry local or regional regulations, and also creates a level playing field among companies as they all strive to reach the same high bar.
USCAP, which also includes powerful NGO members such as The Nature Conservancy and the National Wildlife Fund, has pledged to “work with the President, the Congress and all other stakeholders” to enact a climate change program at the earliest possible date. The six principles the USCAP suggests for this policy, include:
- Account for the global dimensions of climate change;
- Create incentives for technology innovation;
- Be environmentally effective;
- Create economic opportunity and advantage;
- Be fair to sectors disproportionately impacted; and
- Reward early action.
Click here for USCAP’s solutions-based report, which lays a blueprint for a mandatory economy-wide, market-driven approach to climate protection.
The weather for the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade last month was described as unseasonably balmy and San Francisco had a cooler than usual Indian summer. These weather anomalies pose an interesting challenge for the fashion industry, which claims to lose several billion dollars a year as a result of the unexpected temperature swings, according to this NY Times article, describing the effects of weather disturbances on the fashion industry.
The apparel industry, worth $200 billion in the US, is addressing this challenge by taking out insurance against unexpected weather and hiring in-house meteorologists to advise on what kind of clothing to sell throughout the year. Target’s climate team and Liz Claiborne’s climatologist increasingly advise on seasonless and lightweight fabrics such as matt jersey. Weatherproof, which supplies coats to large department stores, insured itself for up to $10 million when predicting the weather became as probable as “a crap shoot,” according to the company’s president.
Retailers used to consider September the beginning of fall, but Target now waits until November to stock heavy jackets, and even then sells very little wool.
Although the verdict on climate change may be out for some, the International Panel on Climate Change confirms what the fashion industry has suspected. The latest IPCC report found that over the last 50 years spring has come earlier and fall has come earlier, shortening the cold season by two weeks.
It would be interesting to know what actions the apparel industry is taking to avert the effects of global warming, such as increasing the efficiency of their factories, warehouses, offices and fleets; sourcing organic fabrics and using fewer synthetics; reducing their water usage (which in turn reduces energy usage significantly); building new facilities to LEED standards; and reducing their waste. Doing these things might mitigate the need for expensive insurance policies and would likely result in cost savings in general.
PowerShift07 was the first national young adult summit aimed at solving the climate crisis, in which youth descended on Washington this last weekend, to focus on building a clean energy economy.
In a display of activism the likes of which rarely seen these days, they caused a branch of Citi to close for the day, after calling out Citi as a major financier of coal mining and causing a decent ruckus. See the video here (3 min).
The young activists are rightly concerned that their student loan payments to Citi are financing mountaintop removal and contributing to global warming.
Sustainable Life Media reports this week on exciting new eco-strategies of several large corporations, including:
ING’s plan to purchase wind energy credits equal to 100% of the energy used in it’s US offices
Kohl’s plan to power 63 of its 80 California locations by installing a total of 138,000 solar panels on store rooftops
JC Penny, who’s newest Denver store will pilot a series of energy-saving initiatives. Penny’s Senior Vice President said, “We conducted a top-to-bottom review of our store construction process and equipment to determine where we could operate more efficiently…while maintaining reasonable costs. ”
Sun Microsystems has launched OpenEco.org to help companies cut their carbon footprints by benchmarking against one another, setting goals, and sharing best practices.
Dell is the first major computer manufacturer to commit to carbon neutrality and will focus on energy efficiency, reducing operational emissions (from electricity usage and heating and cooling) and will offset any non-renewable energy usage and employee’s transportation.
Office supply competitors Staples and Office Depot both have LEED certified stores underway.
It appears that a healthy dose of competition may be underway in the cases of Kohls/JC Penny and Staples/Office Depot. As firms vie for the title of “greenest” in their industry, watch eco strategies become more and more rigorous as they move from harvesting the “low hanging fruit” (as we mostly see here) to truly shifting industry standards for efficiency and CSR.
A group of the world’s leading banks, including Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and Lehman Brothers Holdings are urging the United States and other industrial nations to quickly adopt a Kyoto-based cap-and-trade system, rather than a carbon tax. If such a system is adopted, the banks could find themselves at the forefront of a vast new business. Also, low-emitting industries would profit from selling unneeded permits to their lagging counterparts.
The New York Times reports that carbon traders believe that if developed economies agree to take part in the second-phase Kyoto negotiations in November, emissions permits could become the world’s largest commodities market.
The European Union already operates a cap-and-trade system, the European Climate Exchange, in which CO2 emissions are regulated by the government, and a limited number permits that allow for excess emissions are traded on a carbon market.
While the EU system got off to a bumpy start in 2005, when permits were overallocated and undervalued, it has since been corrected so that permits are scarcer and costlier. In the system proposed by the banks, prices on emissions permits would be capped, however others believe that limiting price caps will drive innovation toward cleaner industrial processes and technologies. I agree.
Using the sky as a landfill for waste – waste represents an inefficiency, lack of a closed loop – should be the expensive option, not the free one.
