GreenMode Sustainability Developments

Leadership on Climate Change - 2 minute youtube pitches

2011-10-17T11:16:00.004+10:30

Action on climate change continues to challenge everyone. As Australia inches closer to a price on carbon Annabel Crabb (ABC's Chief Online Political Correspondent) asks six leading Australian's if anyone really has the courage to act.

Senator Penny Wong takes on this challenge. She was Australia's Climate Change minister through our first two attempts to introduce a carbon trading scheme. Now the finance minister, she talks about how climate change exposes the shortcomings in our political system. We need to cooperate for the long term. The facts about climate change are obvious... yet they've become irrelevant. Watch her short opening pitch.

The full line up is Niki Vincent (Leaders Institute) introducing the forum and talking about the adaptive leadership challenge we face. She highlights "climate change means giving up on some things . But in such a shift there are many opportunities for liberation and creativity"

Andrew Stock (Origin Energy) is the first panellist to take on the challenge. He has no doubt that our society can tackle climate change head on. Previously the Marshall Plan rebuilt whole countries. Imagine what we can do like this to address this problem.

David Klingberg (Centrex Metals) focuses, in part, on the need to fund adaptation. We urgently need to review our funding priorities. He's followed by Senator Wong "hardest action for politician is to ask people to act now to make tomorrow better" (video above).

Professor Mike Young (Environment Institute) highlights how counter intuitive we are about climate change. "Why would any nation go out and subsidise the destruction of the planet?" he asks. And we perversely almost ignore more significant price impacts, e.g. from much larger currency exchange price movements.

David Knox (Santos) puts forward the numbers on change. Santos action demonstrates the potential as does his own. As the company CEO he is nevertheless in part motivated and challenged by his children to make a difference.

Stephen Yarwood (Lord Mayor Adelaide) finishes the 2 minute leadership summaries with a another personal perspective. Am I being authentic? Ask your children, ask your parents. That's why he drives an electric car and supports a carbon tax.

The full panel dissuasion with audience questions is also online - watch to the end of question time for a most pertinent and apt pacific island summary. Climate change is already impacting the questioner's islands. People are currently already losing their land and culture as a result.

I get the last say summarising some of our panels discussion and some of paradoxes - do we really have the leadership courage? While other countries talk about green growth and deep greenhouse gas emissions cuts in Australia we are fractured. We have a highly polarised and divisive community debate.

Resolving climate change paradoxes - do we really have the leadership courage?

2011-09-30T15:27:00.004+09:30

While other countries talk about green growth and deep greenhouse gas emissions cuts in Australia we are fractured. We have a highly polarised and divisive community debate.

Last night the Environment Institute and the Leaders Institute of South Australia took us beyond the division with a high profile team of panellists.

Our question - what leadership is needed to act on climate change?

The common thread on the night was vision - holding it, enabling it, moving our society to focus more on the future. However, the fact that we don’t currently have this is quite a paradox. It is manifestly in our common self-interest to act on this issue. Yet the fear and pain that people may feel seems quite out of proportion to the common explanation – financial costs.

Niki Vincent (Leaders Institute) put this succinctly introducing the forum and talking about adaptive leadership:

We are all going to have to give some stuff up. And I don’t mean the equivalent of the cost of a cup of tea in a café a day - or any of the other common economic measures about climate change.

The theme is picked up by Andrew Stock (Origin Energy). He highlights on climate change we experience news dominated by fear. At the same time we have 1,000 MW of solar installed by households across Australia. These are people acting from their hip pocket.

It's a classic confusion. Stephen Yarwood (Lord Mayor Adelaide) illustrates it from the perspective of a business worried about action on climate change. The business person put to him that this means reducing car parking spaces and potentially trade (fewer shoppers). But, what the businesses really want is more people walking past shops, something you don’t necessarily get with more car parks and traffic.

Professor Mike Young (Environment Institute) also highlights this disproportionate fear. Changes in the Australian exchange rate, and costs caused by it for exporting industries, are massive compared to the very small (one to two per cent) climate price impact. But one is hot button topic and the exchange rate is almost disregarded.

This bizarre disjunction is mirrored with the business community and perspectives of big business attitudes. David Knox (Santos) talks about there being far more common ground between business and government than people are led to believe.

And all this is going on while we’re clearly feeling the impacts of climate change – now, as David Klingberg (Centrex Metals) points out.

But it is very hard to translate this knowledge and transcend the fears. As Senator Penny Wong explains:

It’s very hard for politicians to argue ‘people should act now for the benefit of the future’

Senator Wong also reminds us about the fragility of reform and consensus. It should never be underestimated how easy such consensus can fail. Annabel Crabb (ABC and the forum’s facilitator) ably illustrates this reflecting on how in just 4 years Australia has moved from both major political parties agreeing to, ‘a pile of political roadkill, a confused and hostile electorate’.

The common call from the whole group is to make time to dream, to vision, to talk about the future.

This work needs to be continuous to enable such change.

Download the full podcast of the event here.

Leadership in a Changing Climate. Does anyone really have the courage to take it on?

2011-09-29T13:23:00.011+09:30

In Australia, we struggle to get the climate change discussion past immediate hip-pocket lines. Our public debate isn’t about the sort of future we want. Rather it’s much more around the fear of change and potential pain.

Tonight (Thursday 29 September 2011) some leading voices from South Australia try to step out of the immediate, lead our thoughts to possible futures, engage our hopes and potentials and, help think through the leadership needed to answer this pressing challenge.

This is at a Leadership and Climate Change Forum. Annabel Crabb, it’s moderator, points out we’re living in a modern day tragedy:

On climate change, this nation [Australia] essentially had consensus in 2007; our politicians applied themselves diligently to the situation and four short years later we've got a pile of political roadkill, a confused and hostile electorate and two protagonists who nobody likes, shouting themselves hoarse while their offsiders go through each others' bins...

So how do we get past this? Panelist Senator Penny Wong says:

We have to continue to talk to the Australian people, talk with the Australian people about why action on climate change is important, why we can't just let this go, why we can't just say, ‘Let's leave this for someone else to deal with.’

For panelist David Klingberg some of this is a mix of government and personal leadership:

I resent the government typecasting emitters as polluters; if you want collaboration it is not the right way to go about it. … In some ways I’m providing leadership by supporting what the Commonwealth has done with some modifications, the problem is with the industry there are a lot of people with vested interests.

In these quotes - and the longer articles they come from - there are many paradoxes. Conflicting positions that seemingly defy logic. Niki Vincent from the Leaders Institute of SA (which is organising tonight’s forum along with the Environment Institute) helps us to step through some of these issues.

Climate change is an adaptive problem – not a technical problem. Adaptive problems are tangled, complex, and involve multiple systems. Solving them requires new learning, creativity, innovation and new patterns of behaviour – changes of hearts and minds. Painful adjustments.

Another paradox is we have compelling evidence that action is in our interests. But our society is seemingly cognitively avoiding connecting with this evidence. We would say that we want a better life. But we don’t act to create it at anything like the rate that makes rational sense.

These conflicts and contradictions are inherent to any complex problem. However, this doesn’t mean we can’t solve them even though we will make many mistakes while doing so.

There’s a high powered panel discussing this tonight.
The livestream is here at 6pm Adelaide time and these are the instructions if you need help. Panel is:

Senator Penny Wong, Minister for Finance and Deregulation in the Gillard Labor Government,
Andrew Stock, Director, Executive Projects, Origin Energy Ltd
David Klingberg, Chairman of Centrex Metals and former chairman of the Premier’s Climate Change Council.
The Right Honourable Stephen Yarwood, Lord Mayor of Adelaide
Professor Mike Young, Executive Director of the University of Adelaide’s Environment Institute
David Knox, Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of Santos Ltd

All facilitated by Annabel Crabb - political commentator and the ABC's chief online political writer.

Climate Change Schism?

2011-03-31T17:12:00.008+10:30

When Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger wrote the Death of Environmentalism, controversy raged. They argued - after interviewing more than 25 of the US environmental community’s top leaders, thinkers and funders - people need to search beneath symptoms, that appear to be causes, for deeper issues.

For example, the cause of global warming is too much greenhouse gas. Which leads to action; lets legislate to cut emissions.

So what's stopping us and this solution? They asked us to consider obstacles like:

Our failure to articulate an inspiring and positive vision.
The radical right’s control of all three branches of the US government.
Trade policies that undermine environmental protections.
Overpopulation.
The influence of money in American politics.
The inability to craft legislative proposals that shape the debate around core American values.
Poverty.

The point is not, just, that there are many barriers. But the solutions we seek to implement depend on how we frame the problem. That is, how deeply we look beneath, while still including, the initial causes like greenhouse emissions.

Death of Environmentalism was written in 2004. Fast forward to today and we want to be picking policy winners. The best solutions are those that we can implement now and for the future. Not the most perfect, ideal, cap and trade system (or other mechanism) if they never becomes law.

In today's terms it also means standing in other's shoes - people who don't believe action on climate change is important. This could vitally avoid a schism like the USA abortion debate - a climate-action fracture Bryan Walsh outlines here.

Summer and science week

2011-03-30T18:20:00.005+10:30

Communicating science is vital, difficult and challenging. Just how do we effectively talk about probability and likelihood of increased impacts on humans with climate change? Science, communication and psychology has a big role to play.

Just one example to illustrate the point. The Fear Won't Do It study looks at what we commonly see with climate issues - the risk of destruction to ice caps, the Barrier Reef, coral bleaching, increased severity of dangerous storms and, likelihood of more/longer heat waves etc. While this might grab people's attention it is generally an ineffective tool for motivating genuine personal engagement.

Research like this argues we should be engaging people's personal concerns. And understanding environmental leadership.

Part of this leadership, in Australia, is National Science Week. And within this is a social media challenge to science communicators. See details - complete with free tickets to win to How I Ended This Summer - here...

Image from the film How I Ended This Summer. It's shot at an Arctic research station.

March mind shifts

2011-03-28T11:33:00.004+10:30

While Japan struggles to shift mountains of debris and deal with human tragedy from the gargantuan tsunami, the ongoing Fukushima nuclear accident is seeing some significant mind shifts.

George Monbiot's change of heart has the highest profile. A widely regarded environmental advocate, Fukushima has taught him to stop worrying and embrace nuclear power. He says:

On every measure (climate change, mining impact, local pollution, industrial injury and death, even radioactive discharges) coal is 100 times worse than nuclear power...

(But) there are no ideal solutions. Every energy technology carries a cost; so does the absence of energy technologies. Atomic energy has just been subjected to one of the harshest of possible tests, and the impact on people and the planet has been small. The crisis at Fukushima has converted me to the cause of nuclear power...

Not shifting is Amory Lovins from the Rocky Mountains Institute. He finds nuclear so slow and costly that building plants reduces and retards climate protection.

Here's how. Each dollar spent on a new reactor buys about 2-10 times less carbon savings, 20-40 times slower, than spending that dollar on the cheaper, faster, safer solutions that make nuclear power unnecessary and uneconomic: efficient use of electricity, making heat and power together in factories or buildings ("cogeneration"), and renewable energy...

Who's right? Barry Brook makes the base case for nuclear safety and why we need it here. Amory Lovins for efficiency, distributed power generation and why nuclear is out of date here.

Image: Fukushima Daiichi March 14 2011

Climate action and the message

2011-02-28T12:31:00.004+10:30

Three quarters (76%) of Australians believe it is important to take action on climate change. This support, of course, doesn't necessarily mean action and Australia is trying again to introduce a price on carbon.

So how important is the pitch? Here's PM Julia Gillard on talkback radio (Feb 25 2011):

The government, in a methodical, careful, structured way is doing the right thing to create a clean-energy future for this country, to make sure we've got jobs in the future. I don't want this country to be left behind.

The pitch mirrors what we know from climate change polling. Words and perspectives are important. This Stamford University study on USA attitudes illustrates just how important. The study asked the following questions with significant changes in results. And you'll see some of the lessons mirrored in the statements above.

1. What do you think is the most important problem facing the country today?
In this traditional question, about 49% answered economy or unemployment. Only 1% environment or global warming.

2. What do you think is the most important problem facing the world today?
This increases environmental issue responses to 7%. 32% say economy issues.

3. What do you think will be the most important problem facing the world in the future?
With the future, 14% chose environment/global warming. Economic down to 21%.

4. What do you think will be the most serious problem facing the world in the future if nothing is done to stop it?
Now, 25% say environment issues. Only 10% pick economic.

Picture: Word cloud from Feb 24 PM press release.

One health

2011-02-27T17:51:00.000+10:30

Human health is profoundly affected by the animals and the environment in which we all live. That's the starting point for the One Health initiatives - a holistic slice of health with connections between human disease, animals and sustainability.

One side of this is predicting disease drivers and outbreaks from environmental losses and human connections. EcoHealth Alliance highlights two big factors for disease outbreaks land use change - if we chop down a forest you change the dynamics of wildlife in that forest, you put people in there and they make contact with wildlife and you get these diseases - and travel and trade. Mapping the impacts guides intervention and prevention as well as protection.

One Health also encompasses practical action, including environmental awareness, preventing future animal to human diseases epidemics (e.g. like SARS). For more see this February's 1st International Conference on One Health in Melbourne and this Australian Health Report story about it.

Loss not gain?

2011-02-23T17:24:00.014+10:30

Nick Stern, in his ground breaking economic review, prescribes three essential elements for addressing climate change. We're familiar with the price and technology approaches. But less is said about the third - behaviour change.

The American Psychological Association's Global Climate Change task force report is a great addition to this behaviour space. It includes strategies for delivering action.

For example, people cut their energy use competitively if their neighbours are doing it. But not so well when asked to use fans instead of a/c, turn off lights or look after future generations. And financial savings are not too effective either, the influence of your neighbours can be far more important.

How cost is framed is also important. Many business cases, showing the profitability of energy efficiency, inexplicably gather dust. These cases often focus on savings. Yet future loses are a more compelling motivation. It's better to tell people and businesses they are wasting $100,000 a year than we can save 100 grand.

Naturally, there's a lot more - such as identifying whether your stakeholders respond best to the influence of neighbours or are a group of globally minded and motivated citizens - see The Mind.

Also see Climate Change Leadership and Worldenergyblog (picture above) on psychology. But... for a quick (unscientific!) snapshot ...

Vote for the most compelling Murraylands Life sales pitch. I'd buy this home if told (click if you can't see poll):

Simple supply chains

2011-02-23T13:01:00.002+10:30

Business knows supply chains are vital. For both direct profit and, in an increasingly connected and information rich world, the embodied environmental impacts.

But, these are not easy assessments. The ecological backpsck concept helps. It creates one measure for the total amount of materials that go into producing a product or service.

As you'd expect services tend to have a smaller backpack. 2kg of materials are used to let you watch a movie for an hour. Versus 53kg to create a coffee machine.

There's some obvious wins here as society changes. It takes two and a half times less material to download music versus buying the equivalent CD. And some rather staggering numbers. A ten gram wedding ring has a five tonne backpack.

For business, as the Harvard Business Review highlights this month: societal needs, not just conventional economic needs, define markets, and social harms can create internal costs for firms. Concepts like the ecological backpack help define the connection between society and economic progress - unlocking a wave of innovative growth.

Picture: Screen shot from ecological backpack video. Volkswagen Autostadt exhibition.

The Mind 2010

2011-01-31T17:05:00.002+10:30

The previous two posts focused on numbers and technology. And, if this is what is driving climate change solutions, then surely we would have already implemented the proven, low cost and profitable solutions.

Unfortunately we are far from doing so. Various estimates, such as this McKinsey study, find that changes can be made using currently available technologies - and with a good rate of economic return to individuals or organisations - at more than twice the current rates of implementation.

It's quite something of a paradox. We say that the cost of taking action on climate change is an impediment to business and society sustainability. But we also do not act when it is profitable and the financial rewards, through energy efficiency, can be achieved at low risk.

To bridge this action gap some experience from waste generation, recycling and disposal is very relevant. We often look at the world through only one or two lenses - measurable objective numbers and profit. But successful waste and sustainability interventions are doing far more than this.

These interventions actively consider the worldviews and perspectives that individuals hold. And they are considering the organisational culture or society's developmental centre of gravity.

In other words, when we look at the world through four lenses, including things like:

Culture
Personal beliefs and worldviews
Individual environmental footprints
Organisational profits

We get better results. It's a big topic and, for more, please see this talk: A thinking feeling lean wasteline.

Image originally from Barrett Brown presentation to Integral Sustainability Colorado workshop 2006. Previous post in this series The Tech

The Tech 2010

2011-01-31T17:02:00.001+10:30

There's always a lot of innovation in a year but 2010 saw clean technologies take out 4 of the top 5 spots for venture capital funding.

At the same time very substantial implementation efforts were underway How about catching the train from China to London in under two days? Links between China, Vietnam, Thailand, Burma and Malaysia have already started.

Staying with China rail, it also announced the first fuel cell train on top of the world’s fastest train, More generally the country is about to pass its own clean technology targets by a large margin.

Transport also continued its electric push. For a big business plan example you can't go past GE. The company is predicting $0.5 Bn in turnover from a business decision to buy (not sell) 12,000 Chevrolet Volts. Revenue is generated through the associated infrastructure and other spin-offs for the company.

Are we seeing the light? Maybe. And in practice (sorry) GE's new LED bulb went on sale Monday 6 December. It's statistics, 77% less power for the same amount of light, are not trivial. Especially considering the International Energy Agency finding that we could cut global electricity consumption by almost 10% with such changes.

2010 also may be the year when managing power demand - the times we all want to switch on appliances like air-conditioning together - finally came of age. Solutions such as standards and building demand started to mature and, for some big numbers, the Brazilian government announced a mandate for 62 million digital networked electric meters!

And lastly growth in renewable power generation continued to grow exponentially. The World Wind Energy Council is predicting over a 26% increase for 2010 which, on top of a measured 31% increase in 2009, continues the trend to double wind energy every 3 years.

Next The Mind; Previous The Money

The Money 2010

2010-12-31T01:35:00.001+10:30

Follow the money. It's a famous tradition and there's been lots of impressive 2010 announcements. These include the big picture: India's green domestic product; and, the International Energy Agency calling for the world to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies. These currently stand at $312Bn in 2009 versus renewables at $57Bn

At a project scale there are substantial moves and the numbers are getting large: a $1.3 billion finance package and loan guarantee for the world’s biggest on land wind farm in the USA. Or the world's largest solar project close to securing a loan guarantee. Overall wind power grew 25% globally this year, representing about $60 billion of investment (at USA costs).

It's not only big projects but coordinated individual action as well. For example, in Australia 100,000 rooftop solar panels were installed this year. That's more were installed in the entire previous decade.

On a company scale, GE's business case for buying (not selling) electric cars sees it predicting a half billion dollars in revenue. And a sector scale HSBC estimates energy efficiency opportunities to be a $1.2 trillion market in 2020.

Next post continues the 2010 wrap looking at Technologies Previous post Overview: The Money, The Tech The Mind

Green: The money The tech The mind

2010-12-31T01:32:00.001+10:30

2010 more than ever before has seen clean green solutions becoming mainstream. Here's a short sweep across the changes, from the more conventional money and technology measurements to the as important, if not driving underpinnings, individual mindsets and our local and global cultures.

The wrap: We've seen five waves of innovation since the industrial revolution and the sixth wave could be a clean revolution. But is it mainstream? Or more to the point when is it likely to be?

There are some compelling signs. These cover from big picture measurement: Bloomberg reporting India will have a Green Domestic Product by 2015 (environmental costs into GDP source press release); to, pop culture: electric cars in rap and the movies.

There's a pressing need with indicators, such as greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity impacts, continuing to head in the wrong direction. We need fast change, past just technical solutions and into society.

Hugo Spowers, founder of Riversimple, frames this opportunity well. He says the principle barriers to sustainability aren't actually technical. If you are prepared to change multiple things simultaneously you overcome so many barriers. Listen to the whole interview here: hydrogen car, new business model

This is a set of four short posts covering some of these changes. Next: The Money

Power for Scotland: Zero carbon

2010-11-30T09:40:00.006+10:30

2010 has seen - at least in the first half of the year - a fair bit of pessimism on climate change action, particularly government policy. But, with the US National Academy of Science saying warming is a settled fact, many governments have continued to act regardless of slow progress on a global agreement.

Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond is a good example. He says green energy is a pivotal turning point in human history. Scotland has committed to 80% green electricity by 2020 and reportedly 100% by 2025. Technologies include offshore wind and the world's largest tidal turbine.

The Scotland's overall emissions cut target is 42% by 2020. Recent research finds a 40% European wide cut is achievable by 2020. And the payoffs are substantial with HSBC estimating a global low carbon economic opportunity of up to USD 2.7 trillion by 2020.

Image: Visit Scotland

Your sustainability business case

2010-11-22T15:00:00.000+10:30

Most people agree a business case for sustainability is critical. However, the initial findings from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Sloan Management Review 2010 sustainability survey finds nearly half of its responders have not yet developed one. But they are spending money on it anyway.

The full report is set to be release in January 2011. Check here for details. Early results include finding:

Forty-seven percent of those who are substantially outperforming their peers have developed a business case for sustainability.
Among lower performing companies, only thirty percent have developed a business case for sustainability.
Fifty percent of North American companies have yet to try to develop a business case for sustainability efforts, compared to thirty percent in the Asia-Pacific region.

At the same time potential profits are substantial. Just one example - GE has announced an expected nearly $0.5 billion of revenue in 3 years catalysed by buying (not selling) clean technology electric cars.

All of which leaves open questions. What's holding other companies back?

A clear business case needs more than the profit numbers. For effective leading sustainability change its about managing the visible objective measured change as well as viewpoints, values and cultural world-views that sit beneath this - the invisible drivers. In other words, a sustainability case that is right for the organisation.

Google to Shweeb: Clean Transit

2010-11-22T13:57:00.001+10:30

Want to fly above traffic propelled by your own legs? That's the inspiration for Schweeb (pictured) inspired from Tokyo.

It may sound a little unlikely but Google has invested $1 million in the project. The Schweeb is one of 5 winners, out of 150,000 ideas of Google's, 10 to the power of a 100 project.

10^100 is a call for ideas to change the world by helping as many people as possible.

What's it worth? 60 billion AUD?

2010-10-28T14:40:00.000+10:30

Valuing natural assets, like near pristine bushland and water catchments, is not always easy. Dr David Suzuki, at a recent Legacy Lecture in Adelaide, put it succinctly saying: 'in his view it was no longer acceptable to damage pristine environmental systems - there are far too few of them left'.

The Australian New South Wales Planning Assessment Commission agrees. In its Project Assessment of BHP's 60 billion dollar coal project - just outside of Sydney - it found:

"the level of impacts proposed ... for some significant natural features are no longer acceptable practice. ... The Panel is of the view that it is no longer a viable proposition for mining to cause more than negligible damage to pristine or near-pristine waterways in drinking water catchments or where these waterways are elements of significant conservation areas or significant river systems."

BHP Billiton, after previously holding the project was only viable with mining under this area of significance have now revised the project. The decision effectively puts a high value on significant natural assets. Arguably, the difference between the previous project's value and the new significantly reduced mining proposal.

Tipping Point Australia

2010-10-22T09:56:00.012+10:30

Sustainability is obviously more than numbers and measurement. We know this but sometimes decision making loses sight of our motivations. Consequently, art has a big role to play.

Next week Waking in fear and living in hope – what kind of art do we need now? the first of 3 forums in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane kicks off.

Re-imagining a global future through dialogue and action TippingPointAustralia explore ways we can adapt to and mitigate functionally, culturally and socially the effects of climate change.

There are free public events covering hope to silver linings to citizenship.

The synergy between art and sustainability is strong. The picture above is in my 2005 Graham F Smith Peace Trust dinner talk - full talk and pictures are here. And this year the integration was partly the subject of a joint USA Harvard, Australia and China Climate Change and Society colloquium here.

Or, for an environmental self portrait of America, see Chris Jordan's great site (click the pictures to zoom)! Plus check the full list of TippingPoint speakers, participants and their websites.

Global carbon prices and wind power growth

2010-10-19T09:27:00.003+10:30

If Australia puts a price on carbon - tax or trading - we are not going it alone.

The Climate Institute commissioned Vivid Economics to look at electricity in Australia, China, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States.

It compared clean energy incentives and carbon costs - the graphic illustrates 2010.

Australia has the second lowest price, which arguably results in far less innovation and support for clean technology growth. And the impact is tangible with Chinese wind power capacity now greater than the USA. Its set to expand by another nine America's in the next 10 years.

Climate institute report here, Greenpeace and Global Wind Energy Council here.

6.6 trillion USD

2010-10-10T12:09:00.016+10:30

Hot on the heels of the Carbon Disclosure Project's 2010 report the United Nations has just released its global environmental damage assessment.

At a staggering $ 6.6 trillion - equivalent to 11% of global GDP for damage caused by human activity in 2008 - its bigger than the Global Financial Crisis.

The study projects that the monetary value - from water and air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, general waste and depleted resources - could reach $28.6 trillion in 2050.

Other study headlines include:

The top global 3,000 public companies were responsible for $ 2.15 trillion worth of environmental damage in 2008.
More than 50 percent of company earnings could be at risk from environmental costs (in an equally weighted portfolio).
Damage costs are generally higher than the cost of preventing or limiting pollution and resource depletion.

UN PRI and UNEP Why environmental externalities matter to institutional investors Executive Summary here.

64 trillion reasons to act

2010-09-30T20:42:00.001+09:30

The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) reports are now out. On behalf of 534 institutional investors, holding $64 trillion in assets under management, this is the 8th year CDP has reported. From just 235 organisations in 2003, 2,500 now measure and disclose greenhouse gas emissions - and what their actions are to manage or mitigate the impacts - to the CDP.

Importantly there are some interesting new entries. Like Nestlé which débuts in CDP's leadership index for the first time.

CDP is relevant for any organisation or business. It asks 10 questions of major companies. One of these is what actions are the companies taking in the supply chain. Which means any organisation involved in delivering, or wanting to deliver, a product or service to 2,500 major corporations around the world should read the CDP.

That's most of us and there are 64 trillion reasons to do it.

Bloom Box Blue Gen and fuel cells

2010-09-01T14:40:00.002+09:30

Earlier this week 60 Minutes showed Bloom Energy's Bloom Box and the topic trended #1 on google. It's quite a result - a high level of interest in new technical ways of generating electricity and power.

Fuel cells have great potential. This 3000 home power station in Korea is currently generating electricity and heat at 80% efficiency. It produces power at about AUD 0.23 per unit (roughly similar to the retail price of electricity in Australia) and 50% of this price is gas - a relatively expensive imported commodity in Korea. In Australia or other countries with gas resources the power could be a lot cheaper.

Fuel cells, in a world first from Australian company BlueGen, are also installed in houses. The units, about the size of 2 washing machines, promise to cut household power bills by about $1,100. Costs to the homeowners are still being worked on.

Picture: BlueGen Home fuel cell. It produces up to 75% less carbon dioxide emissions than Victoria’s current coal-fired generators – saving up to 18 tonnes of carbon per unit per year.

Jeremy Rifkin on "the empathic civilization"

2010-08-31T11:40:00.002+09:30

One of the most frequent concerns about environmental sustainability - going green - is that people will only act to maximise self-interest. There's a body of evidence that this is not the case (links below) and Jeremy Rifkin, in this short 10 minute video, summarises some of our collaborative drivers.

The talk covers human behaviours that can deliver a real sustainable advantage to companies acting on climate change.

For some more background see Just who collaborates in the real world? and Carbon neutral companies seeing the advantages.

Big box retail green?

2010-08-26T17:17:00.003+09:30

Walmart is consistently mentioned for it's green sustainability initiatives. From being the first company to work with the Carbon Disclosure Project establishing an emissions strategy for its entire supply chain - over 100,000 companies - to recently with sustainable fish supplies in Brazil and 'traceability' for food products.

Traceability will see it bar code agricultural items. This lets customers quickly find out where food has come from, how it's been produced and is a gateway for transparency. If we know the background for food, it's easier to stop deforestation and other impacts of food production.

Walmart's Héctor Núñez says: Due to all the challenges in cattle raising related to the deforestation of the Amazon rainforest, meat is the first item in this program.

And why take such environmental steps? Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense Fund summed it up speaking about the supply chain initiatives: Walmart’s bold move will help companies identify steps to slash pollution and costs. Importantly, they also point out, its: good for business and good for customers!

Image: Ambalaj sustainable packaging

Liar, liar, we're not on fire?

2010-08-24T17:15:00.000+09:30

Just launched is this excellent summary of Climate Change from the Australian Academy of Science. It should answer everyone's doubts or opposition to taking action. Of course it won't,

So why do we have such difficulty in learning what we most need to know to mitigate our most destructive behaviours? Dorothy Rowe, Australian psychologist and emeritus associate of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, explains that we make decisions, about what to do, from the different interpretations each of us make.

As this New Scientist article about her recent book puts it:

we cannot see "reality" directly. All we can ever know are the guesses or interpretations our mind creates about what is going on. To create these guesses, we can only draw on basic human neuroanatomy and on our past experience. ...

As a result, for global issues like climate change, no matter how much evidence we accumulate our truths will always be approximations. That is lying to ourselves about uncertainty - particularly present in issues like climate change - gives us certainty! Something we desire.

What to do? Climate Change Leadership explores motivation and we shouldn't forget there's significant advantages and profits to be had for countries and businesses that act.

Climate change leadership

2010-08-17T16:15:00.006+09:30

Climate change needs political leadership. It's an obvious requirement but a recent survey from the University of Queensland reveals some startling gaps. Out of 300 Australian federal, state and local government political leaders, 70% agreed with the statement that the planet is warming because of human activity producing greenhouse gases.

However, 17% are uncertain if they agreed or not. It raises the question of what awareness is necessary for these leaders to be informed? The survey finds that politicians say scientists are the most influential people when it comes to framing their views. Yet, less than 40% of the politicians agree with the IPCC scientists on global temperature - that a limit of 2 degrees or less of warming is necessary to avoid dangerous climate change.

It's a global gap. For example in Sweden politicians scored 70% answering questions on climate change. But it's more than a knowledge gap. We must hear discordant voices, multifarious human beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviours says Mike Hulme investigating climate change disagreements.

In other words knowledge is necessary but not sufficient. Understanding how people interpret this information is important.

As Centre for Research on Environmental Decisions puts it climate change solutions are workable, cost-effective technologies which permit society to improve living standards... Yet scientific, engineering, and organizational solutions are not enough. Societies must be motivated and empowered to adopt the needed changes.

Picture: Centre for Research on Environmental Decisions, The Psychology of Climate Change Communication.

Spills, sizes, solar and solutions

2010-08-11T17:26:00.003+09:30

If you've watched the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the headlines - Biggest in History - you may also have wondered what it means. Just how big is big?

One comparison that resonates is, at its peak, it was the size of the US State of Kansas. This is approximately the same size as the State of Victoria in Australia, just under half the size of European France and twice South Korea's land mass.

It's also spawned a few comparisons. What if BP had spilled solar panels instead of oil calculates it would be enough clean energy to power the USA, Central and South America for 25 years. The oil, as opposed to solar, is enough energy for less than one day's power demand. The BP spilled solar panels post also calculates costs.

Clearly solar power, on its own, is not the full, comprehensive, alternative to oil. The Rocky Mountains Institute in 2007 looked at how to Win the Oil Endgame. It documents how USA (and by extension world) oil dependancy can be ended - profitably, securely and equitably - within decades. It demonstrates viable effective alternatives to oil.

Picture: BP Oil clean-up

Just who collaborates... in the real world?

2010-07-31T15:05:00.003+09:30

People in many situations collaborate, for example companies setting carbon neutral targets for themselves.

But does this see the long term protection of resources? Resources that can be overused by individuals and groups resulting in much less for everyone? Like the world's ability to absorb carbon?

The graph illustrates a great example of this in today's world. It shows how voluntary group effort - from lobster fishing communities - has succeeded where government regulation did not.

The blue line is the catch for a degraded inshore fishery. This is in Maine, USA and the fishery is governed by legislated quotas, catch limits and, licensing etc. These rules are not credible with relatively low compliance and strong resistance to strengthening restrictions. And the fish catch, everyone’s livelihood, suffers.

Red is the Maine lobster fishery. Its governed by formal and informal groups strongly influencing state rules. The result - a lot more lobster.

The challenge is to apply this knowledge to all situations including climate change. As a signal of its importance, the joint winner of the 2009 economics Nobel Prize was Elinor Ostrom. Elinor leads much of this work. In the words of the Nobel committee she has challenged the conventional wisdom that common property is poorly managed and should be either regulated by central authorities or privatized. ... user-managed fish stocks, pastures, woods, lakes, and groundwater basins.. often see good outcomes

That is we do protect resources, voluntarily and willingly.

Graph data: Science 12-12-2003 The Struggle to Govern the Commons Thomas Dietz, Elinor Ostrom, and Paul C. Stern

Collaboration

2010-06-29T13:19:00.013+09:30

Humans have to collaborate to address climate change. It's a self-evident fact and often used as a reason for doing nothing - don't act until everyone agrees; action, by any one individual, group or country, can be negated by another.

Yet many carbon neutral companies including Google in 2007 , News Limited Internationally by 2010, PwC in 2008 and HSBC in 2005 must see an advantage. And are willing to act beyond what many would say is the immediate self-interest of the company.

These companies hold out market results, staff and stakeholder engagement, profile, publicity and, innovation on products and services as benefits. But is there also an altruistic element? Are humans wired to collaborate?

Some of evidence comes from experiments. Give people two options:

to work together for the benefit of a group; or,
not to work and rely on everyone else in the group.

Not surprisingly there's a tendency not to work - no benefit for anyone. But if the experiment allows individuals to punish non workers, suddenly everyone tends to work. Even when there is an individual cost for those who voluntarily sanction non workers.

Importantly, if you then allow people in a group that has no sanctions to freely shift to another group they will very quickly move into the one where there are sanctions. That is we seem to prefer just systems which is something the seemingly altruistic carbon neutral companies may also be benefiting from.

So we can cooperate for better lives and the next post's focus is groups and societies that have, historically and voluntarily, collaborated. There's many examples of this with groups answering shared resources issues similar to our greenhouse gas problems.

Details on collaboration experiment here. Picture: J. Sutliff from Henrich, Cooperation, Punishment, and the Evolution of Human Institutions, Science 7 April 2006

Valuing the future over the present

2010-06-23T14:24:00.003+09:30

Vividly imagine value - is there a trick to valuing the future? Humans, generally, care more about the immediate at the expense of longer term. In the field of climate change it's clear that we don't seem to value the future as much as the present.

This future orientation is clearly important. Animals, for example, can act in response to the future:

When a mouse hides before a cat enters the room it is responding to an event that has not yet happened, and its ability to do so is one of evolution's most remarkable achievements.

Humans have this ability too. But we also experience the future simulating it:

in our minds. We know... that it would be painful to go an hour without blinking... that winning the lottery would be more enjoyable than becoming paraplegic... because we can close our eyes, imagine these events... Unfortunately, the conclusions that we draw in this way aren't always right. Trysts are often better contemplated than consummated, and sweetbreads are often better the other way around.

As Daniel Gilbert puts it, it's notoriously difficult to get people to be farsighted. But you can get people to imagine the future more vividly.

Would you like to be 65 with an extra $100,000, is very different from imagine yourself at 65. Will you be living? What will you look like? How much hair will you have? Who will you be living with? With the imaginary scenario suddenly we feel like saving.

Daniel argues these techniques are marginal. But there are also many situations in which humans voluntarily collaborate to protect the future. When humans cooperate is the topic for the next short post.

Clean Production and a Lean Wasteline

2010-06-09T18:14:00.002+09:30

It is more than two decades since we started re-imagining global and local production. By the early 1990's, it was abundantly clear that we should not, nor could not, attempt to create a sustainable society by simply treating and collecting waste.

There are many inspiring examples of change since the 90's. From Natural Capitalism, which shows how we should produce our goods and services, to Factor 4. The most recent demonstrates an 80% reduction of environmental impact per unit of economic output is achievable and available to us today - it's here: Factor 5. Factor 5 covers everything from our homes and cities through to steel and cement, agriculture and transport.

But our overall society now has an even greater impact, by any of the common metrics, on the environment than it did in the 90’s. If resource use and waste avoidance makes such economic sense, as the examples demonstrate, we're entitled to ask what's gone wrong. Why are we 20 years down the track with so many easy wins still waiting to be implemented? And what can we learn from some of the standout examples of change?

This is the first in a series of short blog posts. We've set the scene, so what are some of the barriers - beyond technology - in society, mindsets and worldviews. Next blog is on valuing the future over the present.

The Future

2010-05-19T12:13:00.002+09:30

What do Australian Futures look like? Or rather how can we help shape them? The 2010 Future Summit organised by the ADC Forum tackles these questions head on.

This year marks a dramatic shift for the Forum. While the summit creates a unique and irreplaceable dynamic, by its very nature there are inherent limitations - it's in one place, for an (all too) limited time and our futures are complex, interconnected and dynamic.

To address this, in partnership with Google, the Forum is introducing a year-round digital platform. Google Wave will offer leaders in business, government, community and the arts the chance to engage fully in an ongoing national dialogue.

This kicks off at the summit with six Thought Leader Groups. GreenMode and I are very honoured to be invited to facilitate the Australian Futures group. Other groups will include Investment and Innovation, Green Economy and Global Economy, Local Impacts.

Watch this space, the Future Summit website and Michael Roux's blog for more.

Experts agree but we don't do

2010-05-10T12:03:00.010+09:30

Scientific opinion presents facts and, for example with climate change, often a very high likelihood of sustained and significant economic, social and environmental pain. Yet, even when nearly all scientists agree we don't accept the facts, can instead frame the information in ways that suit our own contrary beliefs or, as individuals or societies are not willing to act.

Why? This perplexing and dangerous circumstance is true even when action is manifestly in our self interest - financial or otherwise. This is certainly the case for climate change. Consequently the Cultural Cognition Project's research is a very welcome addition to our knowledge.

A Cultural Cognition study suggests that, although people view scientific opinion as important, people from diverse cultural outlooks form different perceptions of what most scientists believe. That is, people draw conclusions about the risks of things like climate change that are congenial to their values.

Bottom line - it's not just about the facts. It's how people perceive and value this information and often hold significantly different worldviews. Such views influence perspectives, the ways in which we construct meaning and, priorities we place on action and inaction. See A Climate For Change for a short worldview background.

Picture: From the Cultural Cognition Project at Yale Law School

Factor 5 change

2010-05-08T12:48:00.004+09:30

Can you significantly reduce the energy requirements for standard homes? Yes!

A major project by Delfin Lend Lease, the Queensland Environmental Protection Agency, the Centre for Design at RMIT and GreenMode, using commonly available and off-the-shelf technologies, home impacts can be cut by more than a Factor of Five without any substantial redesign of the home.

The improvements are achieved on typical homes in new South-East Queensland residential development sites. Importantly these changes are affordable. Additional capital costs are approximately paid back by savings on power use.

The project models the performance of a representative selection of 35 standard homes approved and/or constructed at Springfield Lakes near Brisbane. A set of sustainability changes - including efficient appliances, construction materials, shading and only mirror changes to orientation (flip the house on one axis) - were applied. The home's environmental impact was then re-modelled.

The results are outstanding. Affordable change, little or no redesign, and no need for extra architectural input.

Factor Five change is not only about homes although they are responsible for nearly a third of an Australian's environmental footprint. The Natural Edge's Factor Five book shows the way for our whole society beyond just homes.

Post Copenhagen - what do we think?

2010-04-22T10:29:00.002+09:30

Four months on from the Global Copenhagen climate conference and people in Australian may be feeling that climate change and carbon pricing is off the agenda. But is it?

The graph shows worldwide and Australian news reports on climate change (data from Dow Jones Factiva). After the expected peak of reporting in December 2009, during the Copenhagen conference, the media's focus on climate change this year is similar to 2009. At least in quantity.

Clearly the media is only part of the picture. Before Copenhagen, Andrew Norton at the Australian Centre for Independent Studies summarised opinion polls. The results show consistent public support, high urgency, for action on climate change. They also show a majority of people are willing to pay, although the analysis does not consider the substantial cost and carbon savings that can also be made from energy efficiency.

We would say that carbon pricing is still very much on the agenda. Google's Dan Reicher summarises this well. He said recently that carbon pricing is an "essential signal we have to get to" and "money is sitting there to make significant investments".

Why aren't we convinced?

2010-03-26T19:30:00.004+10:30

While the science of climate change is undeniable it does not mean everyone is convinced. I recently presented at an event with Ian Plimer, a leading climate sceptic, followed this week by lunch with Senator Nick Minchin. Senator Minchin led the opposition to Australia's emissions trading legislation.

So the question is why? Messrs Plimer and Minchin passionately argue against the evidence.* They equally passionately argue we shouldn't take action on climate change, even just to insure ourselves against risk.

The insurance argument is compelling. You and I insure our homes against less than a 1% chance of fire destroying the house. So why wouldn't we take out climate insurance, lower our emissions, generate profits from efficiency and be part of the next green industrial revolution? Ultimately, the direct cost of climate change action is probably 1 to 2 percent of global GDP. For Australians that's an average of $8 to $16 a week.

This makes logical sense. But as Hunter Lovins, co-author of Natural Capitalism, puts it in an interview with philosopher Ken Wilber, 'when something is not working we tend to argue harder on the logic'. You'll hear stories listening to a Plimer presentation. Emotive pleas to prioritise far more important issues from Minchin. And it feels so reassuring not to have to act, not to do things differently.

So what's the story of climate change action? It's partly the reason for this blog (and GreenMode). Stories of success, innovation and adaptation - the visionaries and people that are defining the future. It grows from the way it makes us feel and those around us, as much if not more as from the logic of climate science.

* Senator Minchin and Prof Plimer background includes: Four Corners and Minchin; Questions to Minchin at lunch; and, George Monbiot and Ian Plimer.

Climate warming

2010-03-26T17:07:00.002+10:30

There's plenty of evidence linking our human activities climate change. Over the last decade we're also moving from projections about change to observation of changes.

The most recent example in Australia is the Weather Bureau and CSIRO State of the Climate report.

It finds all of Australia has experienced warming over the past 50 years.

It's a trend that continues. Australian average temperatures are projected to rise by 0.6 to 1.5 ºC by 2030. If global greenhouse gas emissions continue at current levels, warming is projected to be in the range of 2.2 to 5.0 ºC by 2070.

The picture shows average temperature rises from 1960 to 2009. Source: State of the Climate.

Emissions down - and it pays!

2010-03-25T16:04:00.000+10:30

Figures released by the Climate Group show Australian emissions from energy use across four states - New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia and Victoria - fell 1.6 per cent over the past three months. These three months of summer often see big jumps in power use. It's the hottest time of the year, air conditioners are running full bore and this Australian summer was hotter than average.

Cut energy use and you cut your costs. That is a lot of these sorts of changes are profitable. The big picture is if we put some of the profits into generating renewable energy, Australia could cut emissions 35% by 2030 - at no cost! For details on how see the McKinsey Greenhouse Gas cost curves.

But can you really make this change? The picture shows a recent addition at my house - a pergola shading north facing windows. The heat reflective panels (opaque) are for summer. When the sun is lower in winter is will warm the house through the clear panels on the left.

The cost? This was financed with an Australian Government Green Loan. The monthly payments on this loan for summer are approximately equal to the power we saved by not using the air conditioning. The bonus - the north facing rooms in the house are noticeably cooler and, in a couple of years, we'll be banking the savings!

Eight Convenient Climate Truths

2010-02-20T18:24:00.001+10:30

It doesn't matter what you think about climate science and scepticism... it still makes compelling sense to cut our carbon emissions.

That's the message sitting behind Amory Lovins' Eight Convenient Climate Truths. Amory says our opinions about climate science shouldn’t change what you should do about energy.

Nor should we argue about the cost to the economy or if it's worth paying to protect the climate. Protecting the climate is not costly but profitable.

The full eight convenient truths are on the Rocky Mountains Institute website.

Our message: act!

2010-02-17T15:23:00.003+10:30

Our message to government and businesses is clear. Act now, says Richard Branson.

He's featured in the forward to the UK's Industry Taskforce on Peak Oil and Energy Security

The credit crunch in 2008 stressed government and businesses to the extreme. Richard says The next five years will see us face another crunch - the oil crunch. This time, we do have the chance to prepare.

It's a report on the end of cheap oil. The authors urge action: We must plan for a world in which oil prices are likely to be both higher and more volatile and where oil price shocks have the potential to destabilise economic, political and social activity.

Download the full report here

Green Customers Up

2010-01-25T17:05:00.002+10:30

In just one year, the number of Australians considering climate change when they buy doubled. Nearly half (47 percent) of people surveyed in the Ipsos-Eureka 2009 Climate Change report nominate purchasing decisions as a main behaviour undertaken to reduce emissions.

This trend is supported by some hard statistics. An Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) survey finds from 2007 to 2008 the number of Australian households buying green/renewable electricity increased – significantly!

The ABS records a 51 percent jump in the quantity of green power sold. The latest national figures show greenpower customers are approaching a million households in Australia.

Picture: Quote from Ipsos-Eureka Climate Change report

A century of warming

2010-01-06T19:56:00.000+10:30

2009 is Australia's second warmest year ever since 1910.

That's the finding from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology who say that 2009 will be remembered for extreme bushfires, dust-storms, lingering rainfall deficiencies, areas of flooding and record-breaking heatwaves.

The graph shows temperature change, averaged over 10 years, the grey bars. It's a consistent picture worldwide - watch the world warm in these NASA animations from 1880 to 2006.

Picturing carbon over time

2009-12-09T11:36:00.001+10:30

Having trouble with lots of carbon numbers and Copenhagen claims? A solution is the World Bank's Data Visualizer. It does a great job in turning numbers into pictures.

It's hard to visualise greenhouse gas emissions, and more difficult still to conceptualise the numbers over time, across countries and against other important measures like economy and health. In the image, the bubble size is total emission plotted against economy (horizontal) and per person emissions (vertical).

Go to the Data Visualizer site, chose what you want to compare - from the left hand side menu - and then press play and watch the changes over time.

And a suggestion for the World Bank. Add future scenarios to this visualiser. It would be great to see the data map a path for contraction of total greenhouse emissions and, convergence to equivalent per person emissions, in the future.

More than GDP

2009-12-01T09:25:00.005+10:30

Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France with his high powered Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress (CMEPSP - including Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen and Jean-Paul Fitoussi) form the latest group to join the call for a better measure of progress than GDP.

The CMEPSP's report (3Mb pdf) highlights current well-being alongside the assessment of sustainability - whether this well-being can last over time. It's recommendations focus on changing our emphasis from measuring economic production to quality of life, equity and our well being over time and into the future.

It's not a new argument - famous examples included Bhutan's Gross National Happiness, Redefining Progress and, The New Economics Foundation. But it is a very prominent call for change.

Nicolas Sarkozy is encouraging a great revolution to economic and well being measurement. Others in France however see GDP here for a long time into the future. GDP criticisms include the non measurement of state expenditure, such as some public health and, the positive value it places on destructive economic activity.

Climate Wisdom

2009-11-30T10:49:00.009+10:30

Large groups of people are smarter than an elite few argues The Wisdom of the Crowds. If this is the case and, to the extent twitter is representative of the Australian population, Joe Hockey should pay attention to the twitter results on his climate change question. He twittered hey team re The ETS. Give me your views please... on Friday.

A random sample of responses to his climate change question finds:

51.6% say support the ETS and/or don't sell out on your previous support for these laws
43.2% say no ETS and/or delay it, it's just a tax
2.1% say become the leader, presumably implicitly saying no to the ETS as well
3.2% say twitter discussion about this is silly

Details of this sample are here.

Joe Hockey asked this question as the opposition liberal party is pushing him to become leader. This change will overturn his previous position - and the party's decision last week - to take action on climate change by passing the Australian emissions trading legislation (ETS).

And the current leaders views? “This is not a game . . . We're talking about the future of our planet. We're talking about whether we, the Liberal Party, will want to be a credible, progressive political movement of the 21st century” 27/11/09 Malcolm Turnbull quoted in The Age.

Nobel Economics

2009-11-29T20:28:00.005+10:30

Alongside Barak Obama there's a second Noble prize surprise this year - Elinor Ostrom for the Economics Nobel Prize.*

Elinor is a groundbreaking economics win as her work covers how humans look after shared resources - we often collaborate to protect environments such as water resources and fisheries. That is humans do not inevitably act as 'economically rational' - out to maximise our profit.

It's often assumed that without outside intervention we will inevitably see a tragedy of the commons. This tragedy occurs as individuals overuse resources - e.g. the global atmosphere's ability to absorb carbon - reducing the quality of life for everyone.

In fact there are many examples where people do collaborate and can achieve far better outcomes than purely government action. The graph above is one such example. It compares the lobster catch in Maine (community driven management - red line) with fish (government management - blue line).

So what do we need for a triumph of the commons? Mark van Vugt's recipe for success is here.

Image: Comparison of landings of ground fish in Maine and lobsters. Source: The Struggle to Govern the Commons, Thomas Dietz,Elinor Ostrom and, Paul C. Stern Science | * The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2009

Cut the Jam - add pedestrians!

2009-11-19T17:47:00.002+10:30

Cutting traffic jams in cities is often about more roads and keeping pedestrians safe from cars - off the road. The idea of shared space is turning this logic on its head - mixing traffic with pedestrians and observing real improvements.

The picture, left, shows Zentralplatz in Biel, Switzerland. Biel's town square has become an encounter zone mixing cars with pedestrians, removing traffic lanes and markings and often traffic lights. Traffic improves for everyone.

This is not just happening in Europe. Bendigo Australia has an ambitious program for shared space* - removing pedestrian crossings and creating an city where people prefer walking over cars.

Dr Rodney Tolley, Director Walk21 and author of the Bendigo transformation study says a study of such shared spaces finds they are incredibly safe. 'We are yet to find a death' in such spaces worldwide, he said in Adelaide today.

As a bonus car traffic is actually cut. Previously people drove between shops in the Bendigo space. Now it appears they walk. This has real economic benefits - shopping district come alive, along with more obvious community and environmental outcomes.

* See page 5 | Pictures: Christian Thomas

Exponential take-off: Solar equals all the world's current electricity in 8 years?

2009-10-31T17:33:00.008+10:30

Wubbo Ockels describes the incredible speed he experienced lifting off into space in the Challenger space shuttle. Within 2 minutes blue sky fades to black, 8 minutes later he's weightless just 200 miles from earth and outside the atmosphere. Minus 200 degrees outside. No oxygen.

From Challenger astronaut to Professor of Sustainable Engineering and Technology at Delft University in the Netherlands Ockels, speaking in Adelaide after the World Solar Challenge, is a passionate solar advocate. He says 'solar is growing exponentially'. From 2007 to 2008 growth was greater than 100%.

If we continue to grow at this rate, 8 years from now solar panels will equal today's global electricity generating capacity. Sound's extraordinary? The numbers are in the table below.

Year	Solar Installed	Global Total Solar Installed	Global installed electricity
	GW/Yr	TW	TW
2007	3	0.0
2008	6	0.0	4.1
2009	12	0.0
2010	24	0.0
2011	48	0.1
2012	95	0.2
2013	190	0.4
2014	381	0.8
2015	761	1.5
2016	1,523	3.0
2017	3,045	6.1

Its waste - not savings

2009-10-26T19:46:00.017+10:30

You've seen the banners: It's simple. Save energy, save money and the environment; Save yourself $350; Cost effective energy savings opportunities for industry.

Is it too good to miss an offer like this? Turns out we often do.

People generally try to avoid a future loss more than they try to achieve a future gain. This can occur even when the size of the financial loss or gain is similar. We know such an outcome occurs for finances and money and researchers David Hardisty and Elke Weber have just shown the same applies for environmental decision making.

In other words, if we are trying to encourage people to take action today - action that has long term benefits for themselves and the broader environment - we are likely to be far better off saying stop wasting $350 rather than the save yourself $350 message.

The UK Energy Saving Trust, despite it's name and proclaiming energy saving week rather than stop wasting money and energy this week, does have a bet both ways. Stop wasting energy and money is on it's home page. | Picture: irtsurveys.co.uk

Climate Talks lead-in

2009-10-20T19:15:00.004+10:30

In the lead up to the Copenhagen Climate talks, amid the carbon cut numbers, cap and trade or tax policy there are some real, smaller picture, stand out initiatives being announced. A few include the French government's announcement of 2.2 billion for electric car charging stations and making it mandatory for office car parks to have charging stations by 2015 (picture inhabitat.com).

In Korea it's hydrogen from landfill gas for hydrogen vehicles and a commercial hydrogen fuel cell that powers 3000 homes (cost comparisons here).

In a slightly different vein - but a sign of the times none the less - Apple, Nike, PG&E and Exelon quit the US Chamber of Commerce over it's climate stance. And UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown has put a size on the low-carbon sector. It is now larger than defense and aerospace combined.

Clearly there's some business and government action at these levels. For the moral imperative, Simon Longstaff of the St James Ethics Centre documents the uncomfortable similarities between climate responses and slavery, as argued in the UK Parliament in 1806!

Home power over your phone

2009-10-19T10:10:00.000+10:30

For anyone who's wondered what's actually going into their quarterly power bill, electricity at home just got smarter.

Google's powermeter promises to show your electricity use from any internet connected device, including your mobile phone. By knowing your power use every day, rather than every three months, the aim is to give you information that helps cut wasted money on power bills.

Trouble was you had to have a smart meter and buy electricity from one of two - Florida and Germany - power companies. And, as Nicholas Stern highlights in his Climate Change review for the UK government: Behaviour is driven by a number of factors, not just financial costs and benefits (see summary). Easy access to information is a step towards such change.

The answer? The Energy Detective a monitor that sends your home's power use to the web. It's not quite all there yet however, 240 volt Australian / Europe versions are due early 2010.

Green Will Save Us - Harvard Business Review

2009-09-30T09:38:00.005+09:30

In a sign of the times, this month the Harvard Business Review proclaims Green Will Save Us on its front cover while Newsweek has published green rankings for the USA's 500 largest companies.

The Harvard Business Review's bold statement sees that "Once and inconvenient truth, climate change is now an incontrovertible problem... Consumers are ever greener, and their support for sustainable products and practices is growing worldwide."

The Review's writers argue that: "organizations can turn sustainability into innovation’s new frontier – achieving competitive advantage and influencing economic recovery in much the same way that the breakthrough products and business models of computer companies led the way out of previous recessions."

We can think of such development in stages - for example:

Viewing Compliance as an opportunity
Making Value Chains Sustainable
Designing Sustainable Products and Services
Developing New Business Models
Creating Next Practice Platforms

It's all adds up to big call to find your business's sustainable and carbon advantages.

Google Earth and climate change

2009-09-29T14:37:00.004+09:30

Google Earth has just released climate change layers showing the world as it responds to and is impacted by climate change. Narrated by Al Gore, you can tour the world from large scale renewable energy to the Greenland icesheet - as illustrated in the picture - and from Amazon community reforestation to the impact of climate change on global human health.

The world climate change tours are also on youtube. And try the Carbon Footprint project for maps of emissions etc. in the UK.

In Australia, the ACF's Consumption Atlas provides local information.

A Green Pharmacy is Gold!

2009-09-18T10:21:00.001+09:30

Whatever your business, the truth is that there are green advantages waiting to be found. The case for small and medium business is just as compelling as for big business as this Pharmacy article shows. At the very least there are competitive supplier and direct profits to be found.

At the big end Wal-Mart is a leading example. Its CEO, Lee Scott, says “our goals are to be supplied 100% by renewable energy … to create zero waste … and to sell products that sustain our resources and our environment. Helping customers buy more sustainable products ... is something that I think all of us can be proud of.”

Boots in the UK ran a 2007 trial putting a carbon footprint reduction label on products. It’s now working with the UK Carbon Trust for a country wide labelling standard. At a store level it’s spent £5 million cutting energy use – expenditure that helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the company’s power bills. And in 2007, 99% of the UK Cooperative Pharmacy’s electricity came from green (renewable) sources.

So where’s the Gold for the Green pharmacy? Read more here.

Green Living Revolution

2009-09-09T12:34:00.000+09:30

A revolutionary example of progressive and sustainable development, says the Murray Valley Standard, is on its way for Murray Bridge in South Australia. It’s a fully commercial residential site setting new world-class and affordable standards. These include the:

Reuse of all water (including stormwater, grey and black water).
A cut to the Carbon Footprint associated with home use by 85%.
Cutting potable water use by a factor of 10.
Highly energy efficient households.
Initiatives that deliver a significant cut to the Ecological Footprint associated with the homes and living in them.
Fitting all 320 houses with 1 kW of Solar PV each.

At this site GreenMode is helping SAID Property Developments deliver a unique package. Many of the initiatives are likely to cost less, or no more, than those that would have a much greater environmental impact at a similar but conventional residential site. The initiatives are detailed here and the work shows how we can simultaneously get excellent results for the environment and economy.

Half price solar

2009-08-31T21:41:00.002+09:30

As you produce more of a specific product - like a solar panel - the price comes down.

Is it really that simple? Over the last year, the price of a solar panel at the factory gate has come down by nearly 50%. From a US$4.20 cents per watt to under $2 and 'still profitable' is the finding from UK's New Energy Finance company.

This positive news is however complicated by the market and global financial crisis. None the less, only a few years ago people installing solar electric power on their houses were calculating 20 to 25 year payback periods. For some the good news, according to the Boston Business Journal, is this payback is now only 5 years.

Picture: Solar power at the same cost as UK grid power by 2013

Ten times better

2009-08-26T10:21:00.000+09:30

Factor Ten – is about making a ten-fold improvement in the use of energy and resources. It can also mean a 90 percent cut in your business or personal costs and its possible to achieve this today - possibly saving ourselves $9 out of every ten dollars.

The picture shows one example – LED downlights. Costing between about AUD 10 and 20 dollars per light, the lights use 2 to 3 watts each. A normal downlight would use 50 watts.

The lights shown in the picture will pay for themselves within 6 months. After this, it’s money in the bank. In addition they should last many times longer than an ordinary 50 watt halogen downlight. This saves you or your business the time and cost of replacing ordinary bulbs.

Of course the answer to climate change is not just about light – although the International Energy Agency finds we could cut global electricity consumption by almost 10% with similar changes. Nor is it (only) about changing light bulb jokes.... But it is a great illustration of profitable and meaningful change that delivers economic and environmental carbon advantages.

Kick The Habit

2009-08-08T15:32:00.004+09:30

Clear simple communication really helps when dealing with a complex global problem like climate change. The United Nation's book, Kick the Habit, is a great example with plenty of useful comparisons.

Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, launched the book. He says:

Addiction is a terrible thing. It consumes and controls us, makes us deny important truths and blinds us to the consequences of our actions. Our society is in the grip of a dangerous greenhouse gas habit. The message of this book is that we are all part of the solution. Whether you are an individual, a business, an organization or a government, there are many steps you can take to reduce your climate footprint.

Picture - examples of greenhouse gas emission amounts generated by different activities or goods. Pictures like this are throughout Kick the Habit.

A Climate for Change - Active Business Responses

2009-08-07T08:53:00.009+09:30

In the world of hard climate science, carbon pricing schemes and emissions targets you could be forgiven for thinking that human attitudes are of lesser importance. Nothing is further from the truth. For example - Nicholas Stern, ex Chief Economist of the World Bank and author of the UK government’s seminal Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change highlights the importance of behaviour change. He emphasises:

Three elements of policy for mitigation are essential: a carbon price, technology policy, and the removal of barriers to behavioural change. Stern Review p.xxviii

Its one of the reasons I (Simon) am thrilled to win a scholarship for a Harvard, China and Australia joint climate change symposium. My excitement is not just for the event but also as it merges science with society. It recognises there is as much to be gained working with people’s attitudes, views and perspectives as with science, technology and pricing.

The humble light bulb is a great illustration. Look around you. In nearly any country you will see incandescent light bulbs or halogen down lights. As Amory Lovins puts it, each of these lights, remaining in its socket unchanged, is the same as walking past a $50 note on the pavement. But, for the last two decades while effective alternatives have been available, many people have nevertheless continued to walk past the light bulb.

Why? Read the full article here>>>

Billion dollar green business

2009-07-22T11:29:00.005+09:30

50% off electronics' greenhouse gases, the world's largest tidal plant, and a hydrogen fuel cell that powers 3000 homes are just some of the impressive Korean green business initiatives.

The first, Samsung has just announced over 4 billion dollars of investment to green its electronics. It will cut the greenhouse gas embodied in its products by 50%. Once past the factory gate goods also use power and, Samsung says, its TVs, refrigerators and air conditioners will be the most efficient (lowest power use) products available.

Efficiency is also central to the stationary hydrogen fuel cell. The plant producing heat & electricity for 3000 homes does so by using 80% of the available energy from gas for a current cost of about AUD 0.23 per unit.

And the world's largest tidal power plant - it will deliver power at approximately half the cost of wind power. Hydrogen and tidal power plant pictures and detail are here. Cost comparisons here.

Business action

2009-07-21T14:51:00.003+09:30

Over a third of Australian businesses are already taking action to cut greenhouse emissions and reduce energy use according to a recent Australian Industry Group and KPMG survey. The report finds nearly 70% of businesses - from a random sample across construction, service and manufacturing industries - are currently acting or plan to act to manage carbon footprints.

For any company there are many reasons to address climate change. Increasingly major companies will demand a supplier understands its carbon footprint. The international Carbon Disclosure Project reports this is already occurring with Cadbury, Colgate-Palmolive, Johnson & Johnson, P&G, Unilever, Vodafone (1) and Walmart (2) among the companies asking suppliers to report on carbon footprint and climate change strategies.

The Carbon Disclosure Project represents Investors with assets of $55 trillion. Its just one of the major reasons why, across the world, companies are looking to find carbon advantages.
The picture shows a stationary hydrogen fuel cell power plant in Seoul, Korea.

1 million green jobs

2009-06-29T23:21:00.006+09:30

As governments around the world move to implement green stimulus packages a standout initiatives is in Korea.

The country is spending $38.5 billion on clean technology and environmental restoration. The Korean Presidential Committee on Green Growth says it will deliver 956,000 new green jobs. The four year package is about 2.6% of Korea's yearly gross domestic product (GDP). Funding goes to rivers, forests, clean transport and bikeways and, green homes and neighbourhoods.

At the same time this strategy is driving private investment. JP Morgan has just announced that it is raising $1 billion to invest in Korean solar, LEDs (high efficiency lighting) and green cars.

Picture: Back to A future, the restoration of Cheong gye cheon. 5.8kms of freeway back to a river.

Network City – Giving Back to China’s Environment

2009-06-27T07:47:00.013+09:30

China is growing and urbanising at an extraordinary rate. With its economic growth there is increased environmental pressure. Among the initiatives to change this – have growth while giving back to the environment – is the Network City by Brearley Architects with GreenMode. Its initiatives include:

Green roofs and walls plus light coloured hard surfaces and/or vegetation across roads – increasing amenity, cutting heat and consequently power use.
Building energy efficiency through the use of green roofs and walls as well as solar hot water, efficient lighting and high efficiency appliances.
The network city integrates commercial and industrial uses throughout its residential, agricultural and recreational areas. This reduces the demand for motorised private transport.
Throughout the city food production is integrated into the street plantings, arbours, parks and gardens plus, roof spaces and walls. The net impact of creating edible landscapes is to reduce the city’s food footprint.

The improvement is illustrated by comparing it to a standard city of 45,000 people. The reductions, such as halving people's power and home footprints, are illustrated in the figure above.

Point and power

2009-06-12T11:48:00.008+09:30

Its a well known and obvious fact that when a surface faces the sun it is exposed to more light. Tracking the sun with a solar panel gives you up to 35% or more power over a similar sized fixed installation. But the motors to make this happen impose extra costs.

In the natural world, plants have evolved to follow the sun. So could we artificially mimic a sunflower and use this to point solar panels at the sun? MIT has demonstrated just such a system using a curved arch made from two different metals. Simple systems like this should be cheap and the techniques, known as biomimicry, have many applications beyond just tracking the sun.

But brining the natural world into today’s society is not just about hi tech applications. The picture illustrates living furniture, grow your own garden settings, certainly unique!

The race to lead

2009-06-11T11:22:00.011+09:30

Traditional perspectives about renewable energy are increasingly being challenged. China's wind and solar growth is one example. Zhang Xiaoqiang, vice-chairman of China's national development and reform commission, talking to the UK Guardian sees 100GW of wind power coming from China by 2020.

That's 50 to 100 coal fired power plants worth of electricity. On top of this solar electricity is set to expand 75 fold. Cummulatively he sees renewables providing close to 20% of China's power in 2020.

In 2008 China ranked second behind the USA for wind power growth. It's been doubling every year for the last four years. With nearly 38% of China's financial crisis stimulus package being spent on green initiatives, western countries will be challenged for clean technology development leadership.

White is the new green

2009-05-28T21:04:00.012+09:30

White roofs and surfaces could be worth a staggering $1,100 billion according to recent research.

Nobel prize winner Steven Chu, Obama's Energy Secretary, is promoting this change. Chu says just changing the colour of roofs and blacktopped freeways and streets is equivalent to taking all of the automobiles in the world of the road for eleven years.

White reflects heat and a worldwide change would help cool the world. As a bonus, light surfaces can help reduce the cost of cooling buildings which reduces emissions. However, Hashem Akbari, the lead scientist behind some of this research is careful to point out that converting to cool urban surfaces does not address the underlying problem of global warming.

These impressive numbers from white roads and roofs are not the only option. Living green roofs and walls can drop temperatures (and associated air conditioning costs) by as much as eleven degrees.

Winds of Change

2009-05-26T12:39:00.003+09:30

In just eleven years, since 1997, the proportion of the world's electricity generated from wind has almost quadrupled. There are some impressive absolute numbers behind this global proportion.

In 2008 Australia's total capacity increasing by over 50%, China doubled its total installed wind power and growth was 50% in the USA.

With this impressive growth comes an equally impressive challenge. Coal still provides over 40% of the world's power. While wind is growing at 29% a year, versus coal's 4.5%, in absolute terms coal still dominates over wind. The International Energy Agency wedges illustrate the challenge.

Big Solar for Oz

2009-05-13T10:49:00.028+09:30

The 2009 Australian budget delivers 1.4 billion dollars - over 6 years - for solar power. So how much solar electricity will Australia get?

The government subsidy is for new solar plants that together produce a coal plant's worth of power - up to 1000MW. Abengoa Solar, a leading solar power company currently constructing solar plants worldwide, put the cost of a 300MW plant at 1.2 billion euros in 2007. In 2009, the Arizona state government announced a 200MW plant for 1 billion US dollars.

The actual cost and reliability of the power generated is as important as the government subsidy for construction costs. The U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates, for solar plants generating power 24 hours a day by storing the sun's heat, electricity will soon cost about US 13 cents a unit.

On this scale, sun power is starting to become competitive with expected future power prices.

Three into One

2009-05-05T12:23:00.007+09:30

Can you fit three houses into one without compromising amenity? If you can then the environmental impact of a home would be cut – significantly!

Recent work by Lend Lease (through Delfin Lend Lease) with the Queensland EPA and GreenMode shows how it can be done. The results, appearing in the Queensland Government's Smart and Sustainable Homes newsletter, are for 35 different homes of the types typically constructed in South East Queensland.

By implementing simple measures - such as insulation, orientation, high efficiency cooling and heating, and window shading - the Ecological Footprint of a home with people living in it is cut by a factor of five.

When construction and the physical maintenance of the house are also included, three of these sustainable homes could fit in the footprint of one 'standard' house (of the type commonly constructed in Queensland).

Cheap 24-7 Sun Power

2009-04-27T11:22:00.010+09:30

Cheap, clean, reliable and continuous electrons are not as elusive as we might think.

A new large scale solar electricity plant for Arizona, USA, shows the way forward. It will generate electricity by turning sunshine into heat and storing power overnight as molten salt.

It's also competitive and big. Using South Australia as a comparison, the plant will generate about a fifth of Adelaide's everyday basic electricity use. And the cost? In 6 years time, $115 per thousand units of electricity. That compares favourably with electricity from gas and also $120 for Adelaide power.

$120 was in the first 3 months of 2008, before any further inflation. It is also before a price on carbon pollution is introduced in Australia.

Solar boom

2009-04-15T09:32:00.021+09:30

Sales of solar electricity systems to Australian households are growing exponentially.

The graph, from Australian government figures, shows solar electricity installation per month.

This growth is occurring despite the Australian government imposing a means test on its rebates. The test currently limits rebate payments to households earning less than $100,000 a year. It was introduced in an effort to cool what Peter Garrett, Australia's Environment Minister, referred to as an overheated market.

In the middle of 2008, when the solar rebate means test is introduced, there is a momentary pause in growth but sales quickly expand again.

The results support reports from many in the solar industry. The industry says people on lower incomes, particularly pensioners, are willing to invest in smart green power. People will pay capital now for future savings.

Real Green Deal

2009-04-09T11:44:00.006+09:30

436 billion US dollars and counting. This dollar figure is the global stimulus funding, according to HSBC, which is helping to address climate change.

Globally, nearly sixteen percent of economic stimulus expenditure goes to such green initiatives.

In Australia this figure is just over nine percent, China it's nearly thirty eight percent and in the USA it's close to twelve percent.

A new industrial revolution

2009-04-08T11:36:00.009+09:30

The latest 43 billion dollar Australian announcement, for a broadband network, is a good example of economic growth that can build a more sustainable economy. Communications are inherently more climate friendly than many other businesses. In Australia, the CSIRO shows every dollar spent on communications produces a third of the greenhouse gas than an average dollar across the whole economy.

This is part of a clean future. It is much easier to supply clean power for economic activities that pollute less.

And there's a big future in clean business. Currently, renewable technologies drive 170,000 jobs in the German economy. By 2020 clean tech, say analysts, may be an industry rivalling or exceeding the information technology sector.

This then is the next industrial revolution - growth in clean technology and, significantly more growth in new and emerging low carbon sectors of the economy.

Carbon Advantage

2009-03-31T12:53:00.007+10:30

It's a curious state of affairs - we don't want Growth Neutral businesses or Neutrally Beneficial social organisations so why Carbon Neutral? The very term implies that there is not a major opportunity to be found in addressing climate change.

Thomas Friedman highlights this and the coming revolution for business, societies, countries and organisations to seek a carbon advantage.

As we transform our economy and build renewable, smart, reliable, efficient power throughout all our activities, we create jobs, social outcomes and also new norms for business. Paul Gilding recently pointed this out arguing the global financial crisis will not sideline sustainability.

Yesterday, Nick Stern author of the UK’s 2006 economic climate change report spoke of this directly to the G20 countries. The opportunity is to invest heavily in energy efficiency and green technology using stimulus funding. It’s a call that some countries have already begun to act on.

Which leads back to the Carbon Advantage - companies and organisations acting now will not just help to answer society's challenges. It also delivers real benefits for the businesses and organisations that do so.

Local food

2009-03-20T12:33:00.008+10:30

The Obamas are about to plant a veggie patch at the Whitehouse. It's not a new idea - Eleanor Roosevelt helped lead the way during the Second World War. But it is a great example of fast change - change that could create a more sustainable world.

Within a couple of years from the start of the war, by 1942 to 43, these home gardens were producing about thirty to forty percent of the US's veggies - not bad for backyard patches...

GFC and Climate - Our Biggest Opportunity

2009-03-08T09:46:00.016+10:30

Nicholas Stern, ex World Bank Chief Economist and author of the UK Government's economic review of Climate Change, recently linked recovery from the Global Financial Crisis and responding to climate change.

He says the good news is that there are great returns to handling these two things together. While there are undoubted pitfalls to avoid, current circumstances are also a huge opportunity - climate change and the financial crisis are intrinsically linked. Stern says now is precisely the moment to change to a low carbon economy.

Financial Recovery and a Sustainable New Deal

2009-03-01T14:05:00.014+10:30

UK Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, is about to address the USA Congress and a global New Deal plus financial stimulus is on the agenda. So will this be a financially and environmentally sustainable new deal? There are some signs.

A snapshot - we have far more funding for energy programs in the US than any bill in history. The UK aims to access a £1 billion economic boost from energy. 3.9 of the 42 billion Australian financial stimulus goes to home insulation and solar hot water.

It is not just government. Recently investors, with US$ 3 trillion in assets, highlighted that climate actions can create $144 billion in savings. McKinsey, in its revised global Pathway to a Low Carbon Economy, finds the global investment required to address climate change is reasonable and "many of the opportunities would see future energy savings largely compensate for upfront investments."

Yes they are - solar powered cars

2009-02-16T09:48:00.003+10:30

In 1998 fast sustainable change was occurring in Delhi. People may think Delhi was unlikely to prioritise environmental and social change. But, within 4 years, the city converted its private rickshaws and bus fleet from diesel and smoky two stroke to compressed natural gas.

Then Delhi built an underground system - on budget and three years ahead of schedule.

Now India's solar powered car is hitting the mainstream, having completed a tour. One of these solar cars travels 90kms on a charge - more than most Australian's daily commute. The tour, highlighted in the New York Times, traveled 2,100kms showcasing entrepreneurs and sustainable solutions across the country.

Co-generated Scotch - och aye

2009-02-15T12:05:00.000+10:30

When Scotland, where I was brought up, announces it's national icon - whiskey - is going green you know substantial change must be underway. Using co-generation Speyside will convert waste left over from the whiskey process into heat and power.

Using the heat, as well as generating electricity, means that far less energy is wasted. Localised schemes like this also save a substantial amount of power by avoiding transmission line losses.

Similar systems can be used for residential homes as well. There's a small demonstration in Sydney and Alan Jones has led the way for UK's Borough of Woking, near London.

Wireless Energy World is Comming

2009-02-12T09:49:00.000+10:30

The wireless world that will monitor and check your home energy use is about to be mainstream. "Google plans to launch a new service, Google PowerMeter, to provide homeowners with access to a Web-based display of electricity use at their home in real time."

It will not just put power information infront of you at home, it brings it to your desktop. Tom Friedman must be happy to see some of his solutions to a hot flat crowded world coming through so quickly! See the greenbuildingadvisor story.

John Brumby and an Expanding Awareness

2009-02-10T22:50:00.000+10:30

Climate Change - Amid the heroes, tragedy and horror that is now approaching 200 dead in Victorian bushfires a new reality, recognising we are in new terrritory, is starting to emerge.

On Lateline (Feb 10) John Brumby (Vic Premier) has been pointing to "the new climatic conditions in which we are operating”. He says "the climate is changing, we are seeing more extreme events... weather events".

Its an encouraging and brave recognition given the present, ongoing, human trauma that is still unfolding. It may also see us charting a different course - away from Clive Hamilton's prediction that "the major political parties will not want to acknowledge the association between global warming and the fires".

Meanwhile Time Magazine Why Global Warming may be Fueling Australia's Fires looks straight at this threat and Australian Firefighters are asking the government to "halve Australia's greenhouse gas emissions by 2020." The Age prints the full letter.