Archive for December, 2010

Well, many people in the environmental movement hope so.

The intentions are there, at least publicly.

But there are big questions that might put into risk doing a full, proper energy market shake up. Here are some of them:

  • The incumbents and the old technology providers have a disproportional higher voice. If you have been there for decades, you sit on the working groups, industry tables and government consultation panels.
  • The disruptive companies and new technology don’t sit on the table. Imagine you wanted to regulate the communications market 30 years ago. You could consult with the landline companies (sorry company) but the actual innovation has been done by companies that didn’t exist (all mobile phone companies, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc). A good shake up would enable these non-existing companies to disrupt the energy market quicker. There will be lots of moves for this not to happen.
  • The full externalities of energy will not be considered. Because there is no global recognition of the full price of carbon primarily. Yes, certain politically acceptable things can be made but political acceptability does not take you to take into account the full externalities (it’s politically suicidal)
  • Populist media will pollute the environment with stories about the cost of electricity. Probably some stories more real than others, this will raise the debate of things such as fuel poverty, which is very artificial. Why don’t we talk about beer poverty or holidays poverty?

Will the coalition government be able to navigate through these risks and deliver a proper shake up? We hope so.

http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/news/pn10_130/pn10_130.aspx

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8204586/The-biggest-energy-market-shake-up-in-25-years.html


MEPs have demanded that Europe improve its energy efficiency by 20 per cent over the next decade and place a renewed emphasis on greener buildings.

This is good news, with a couple of notes.

First, it’s critical to look at energy efficiency as the key enabler for carbon reduction. It’s by far the cheapest way and usually does not require huge upfront investment.

Second, it could have been better. 20% is not very ambitious. Usually if you go for 20% you end up getting 15%. If you for 80%, maybe you get 60%. Why not being more ambitious and let industry and civil society to come up with innovative ideas.

Having a very ambitious target would give the right signals to innovators and the technology industry.

Read more about this here

In the last LCA conference we’ve attended DSM made a very interesting presentation, touching the right sustainability levers of today: LCA, open innovation, the potential of bio/renewable plastics and materials, biopharma, and active packaging.

They have €1b target for innovation sales in 2010.

80% of innovation pipeline to be eco-innovations by 2015.

It is worth watching DSM.

Find the full LCA and Innovation at DSM presentation here

Earlier today I had an article published in The Guardian Sustainable Business Blog where I outline the initiatives around reducing waste at InterfaceFLOR.

The UK will run out of landfill space in less than eight years unless radical measures are taken to improve recycling and reduce waste. The majority of UK businesses rely on landfills to dump waste, however with capacity diminishing rapidly and landfill tax rising annually, it is clear that this option is fast becoming both environmentally and economically unsustainable.

As a manufacturer of carpet tiles, an industry which sends nearly half a million tonnes of waste to landfill each year, InterfaceFLOR has made serious headway in cutting waste. Our pledge is to have zero waste to landfill by 2020 (as part of our ultimate ‘Mission Zero’ goal for zero environmental impact by 2020).

Since the mid-90s we have achieved an 80% reduction in waste to landfill, whilst 36% of our raw materials are currently either recycled or bio-based. We have also saved more than $433m in avoided waste costs. These savings are invested back into our business, to help us to redesign our products and processes and further drive down waste. Our initiatives include:….

Read the rest of the article HERE

Image Source – The Guardian Sustainable Business Blog

7 out of 10 Spanish consumers want more transparency

74% of people in Spain miss more transparency in the information that companies communicate about themselves.

The survey, done by our PR agency Marco de Comunicacion, for InterfaceFLOR, consisted of 1,000 interviews with consumers aged between 18 and 65 years old.

83% would prefer to buy a product more ‘socially or envionmentally sustainable’ and 75% say they would pay 10% more for it.

The gap on transparency / credibility is obvious.

97% think that companies should be forced to undergo independent audits.

My opinion is that there is another big disconnect: reporting and marketing.

While reporting usually deals at corporate level and wastes its time trying to compete on ticking boxes, marketing of products remain self-serving, narrowly correct but misleading in the big picture.

Hopefully one day companies will publish product reporting (ie Environmental Products Declarations)

Plastic Bag Drag!

December 3rd, 2010

Supermarket weekly shopping delivered in 10 plastic bags!!!
I just received my weekly shopping from my usual supermarket.

We  bought the same amount of shopping that we usually do, we manage to pack all our purchases into 3 or 4 plastic bags (reused of course.)

Home delivery managed to deliver the same about of goods in 10 bags.

Only two or three small items in one bag, when we can normally squeeze 10 items on our own, without being packing experts.

How this is possible? Do they have to use more bags for home delivery?

It really contradicts their current policies, branding and fanfare inside supermarkets about plastic bags and then they deliver with so many plastics bags.

I hope there is a reason for it.

Logistics, space, anybody have a clue?