World is Green

Vishal Sharma, a friend from Melbourne, informs me that he is running a Australian Startups Carnival 2008 online.  This is what he says about the carnival.

This is to inform and give some heads up on Australian Startups Carnival 2008 starting on March 3-17 2,008.

Registration is open - Feb 11 -24, 2008

Australian Startups Carnival 2008 is an initiative by VS Consulting Group. This online (web based) carnival is all about learning new ventures started/surfaced in IT, Telecoms, Green Tech, Media in the last couple of years. Vishal covered the sate of web2.0 startups in 2006 for Readwriteweb. But since then lot of water has gone under. We are now expanding our coverage, as some great ideas are being put together and executed. We intend to discover people behind these startups, their motivations, how future looks from their perspective, what technologies are being used, what market segments they are targeting, their mistakes, their advise and more.

Details are available on site as well - http://startups.sharmavishal.com/2008/02/registration-february-11-24-2008.html

If you are running a start-up or you know anybody, do check out the link.

Africa’s tryst with development continues and the theories of development are never ending. Now, Reuben Abraham points to a Business World article titled “Can Greed Save Africa”. Or what can be more appropriately called “profit making”, it provides an example of how plain business sense can provide development opportunities to Africa.

In many ways, Africa’s economic situation seems hopeless. While $625 billion in foreign aid has poured in since 1960, there has been no rise in the region’s per capita gross domestic product, notes William R. Easterly, economics professor at New York University. What’s more, from 1976 to 2000, Africa’s share of global trade dropped to 1%, from an already negligible 3%. The U.N.’s scale of human development, which considers health, education, and economic well-being, ranks 34 African nations among the world’s 40 lowest. Thus far, foreign aid hasn’t made a dent.

Greed, however, might. Thanks to the global commodities boom of the past few years, sub-Saharan Africa’s economies, after decades of stagnation, are expanding by an average of 6% annually—twice the U.S. pace. And like bees to honey, investors are swarming into the region in search of the enormous returns that ultra-early-stage investments can bring. Blue Financial, for example, has already netted its early private equity backers a ninefold gain thanks to the 385% rise in its stock since its October, 2006, initial public offering in Johannesburg. Emerging Capital Partners has bought all or part of 42 African companies this decade and cashed out of 18, with gains on their investments averaging 300%. “The money we can make is matchless,” says Emerging Capital Partners CEO Thomas R. Gibian, a former Goldman Sachs (GS) banker.
[...]
Masoud Alikhani is no moral crusader; he thinks the “We Are the World” movement of the 1980s, which sought donations to end African hunger, “made beggars of whole nations.” The burly 66-year-old is among the new wave of investors at the tenuous nexus of venture capital and agribusiness in Africa. Five months ago he pitched a large hedge fund in New York on the merits of ESV Biofuels, as his company is called. The fund’s partners agreed to take a tour of the facility in January. “We are capitalists and opportunists,” says Alikhani. “We are doing this to make money. That’s the only way to help.”

For more on this Profit vs Aid question, check out the work of William Easterly.

The Age on a report on SMEs and environmental issues.

The Sensis Environment Report found that 37 per cent of SMEs surveyed were already trying to reduce their impact on the environment.

The report’s author, Christena Singh, said the main calls to action from Australians were for business to be more efficient with energy and water (14 per cent) and to recycle and manage waste better (13 per cent).

“These calls to action closely mirror changes already being made by SMEs,” she said. “The most popular change was to introduce recycling, followed by trying to reduce water and energy usage.”

The interesting aspect is the negative impact of drought in almost every state except NT. The learning: Local and current issues matter.

The Age reports on the new initiative by Timberland to provide carbon labelling on their shoes.

The US-based company’s autumn collection includes a grey fabric sneaker, priced at $US49.99 ($A59.40), and a wool-lined leather clog for $US105.

A close look at the labels reveals, however, that the clog is a bargain when it comes to greenhouse gases that cause global warming: 66 pounds (30 kilograms) of carbon dioxide and other gases were emitted in producing the clog, compared with 88 pounds (40 kilograms) for the sneaker.
[...]
Though mostly in use in Britain, the labels are gaining ground in the US. Corporations such as PepsiCo and Wal-Mart are conducting inventories of their products’ carbon emissions and considering labelling.

But climate experts say today’s complex, transnational supply chains make it challenging to accurately assess a product’s carbon footprint — the total emissions generated during production and transportation. And no national standard exists to verify such assertions.
[...]
Calculating carbon emissions was simple enough when you’re talking about buying a tank of gas, said Jonathan Pershing, director of the climate program at the World Resources Institute, which developed a widely recognised method for companies to figure their overall greenhouse gas emissions. But it gets tricky for a more complex product, such as a pair of jeans.

“You have to ask, where was that pair of jeans made?” Pershing said. “Was it made with hand labour or a machine, and what was powering the machine? Where did the cotton come from, the United States or Egypt? If it was from Egypt, was it grown with an irrigation system or (rainwater)? All of a sudden, the analysis becomes, at the moment, beyond what we can do.”

Does carbon labelling increase sales? That is the crux of the issue for companies.

Bill Shannon of Shannon’s way explains how Toll Holdings used corporate responsibility strategically.

How does a company go about setting a CR strategy? The Australian Institute for Corporate Responsibility - formed by the alliance of Shannon’s Way, Deloitte and Our Community - has developed a framework based on CR initiatives in eight areas. For each, a range of best-practice actions are recommended, ranging from low-cost, low-effort starters to those that are high-cost and high-effort.

By tackling all areas simultaneously, a company can achieve an integrated, sustainable CR strategy. The areas are environmental sustainability, human rights, community engagement, workforce, socially responsible investment, good governance, addressing systemic disadvantage, and social marketing.
[...]
One corporation, Toll Holdings, is setting an example. Ten years ago, Toll became involved with “The First Step Program”, a not-for-profit organisation that provides support services for people who are dependent on drugs and alcohol.

Toll encouraged its employees to apply their skills in areas such as business management, HR and IT services to help First Step develop into a fully functioning, well-resourced drug recovery program.

Toll went ahead to employ from this organization. The Australian Institute of Corporate Responsibility explains the eight pyramids and the opportunities available in each one of them.

All businesses should be implementing the most basic practices - the “Dead-Set Winners” - in each of the eight Pyramids: reducing energy, paper and water consumption; not discriminating against employees or potential employees; supporting the local community; enforcing strict health and safety standards; etc.

As you develop and refine your corporate responsibility programs and practice, you can begin to work your way up through the “Good Practice” ideas - those which require moderate investment - and on to the “Cutting Edge” ideas. Assess which of the eight pillars best align with your company’s values and work to embed and consolidate your efforts in one or two of those areas before moving on to the others.

Businesses aiming for an integrated and defendable corporate responsibility strategy should be working across all eight focus areas - environment, human rights, community, workforce, investment, governance, systemic disadvantage and social marketing - simultaneously. It is unlikely that you will reach to the top in all areas at once. Once you are working across the middle sections of the pyramids, assess which of the eight pillars best align with your company’s values and work to embed and consolidate your efforts in one or two of those areas before moving on to the others.

Thomas Friedman writes about the new Save A Watt proposal from the CEO of Duke Energy, Jim Rogers.

 Mr. Rogers’s proposal is based on three simple principles. The first is that the cheapest way to generate clean, emissions-free power is by improving energy efficiency. Or, as he puts it, “The most environmentally sound, inexpensive and reliable power plant is the one we don’t have to build because we’ve helped our customers save energy.”

Second, we need to make energy efficiency something that is as “back of mind” as energy usage. If energy efficiency depends on people remembering to do 20 things on a checklist, it’s not going to happen at scale.

Third, the only institutions that have the infrastructure, capital and customer base to empower lots of people to become energy efficient are the utilities, so they are the ones who need to be incentivized to make big investments in efficiency that can be accessed by every customer.

As Rogers explains, “Energy efficiency is the ‘fifth fuel’ — after coal, gas, renewables and nuclear,” and it is important that a incentivized plan like the ‘Save a Watt’ proposal is implemented. Some of the highest pay back gains in energy will come from energy efficiency. For more on this check out Negawatts vs Megawatts.

At the Indonesia Furniture blog:

Everyone taking part in the discussion agreed there are two fronts where sustainability practices are being addressed. The first is with consumers, as those who care about green practices show their support with their pocketbooks. “Consumers support sustainable products and say products that damage the environment should not be in stores,” said Italiano. As that support becomes more mainstream, retailers are being called to not only create more sustainable products, but make them affordable. “We are in a race. We need to reach the consumer,” said Gerry Cooklin of South Cone and the Sustainable Furniture Council from the audience.

On the other front of the sustainability issue are vendors who supply retailers with products and materials—vendors who are embracing green practices less quickly.

Both retailers on the panel said they work closely with their manufacturer partners and suppliers on various sustainability standards, in some cases making this a condition of doing business. ABC Home has a “good wood” program and shares with vendor partners packets explaining sustainability. Yet Chender said several years ago when her company approached suppliers about its good wood program, some balked or did not give the initiative much attention.

Rupert Murdoch announced In May 2007 that News Ltd would become a Carbon Neutral Company by 2010. That is a great commitment by itself. However, what was more important was the focus of Murdoch on the audience that his papers captures.

He said:

Our audience’s carbon footprint is 10,000 times bigger than ours… That’s the carbon footprint we want to conquer. We cannot do it with gimmicks. We need to reach them in a sustained way. To weave this issue into our content– make it dramatic, make it vivid, even sometimes make it fun. We want to inspire people to change their behavior

The challenge is to revolutionize the message.

My conclusion was that, The real message in the speech is this: The unique potential– and duty– of a media company are to help its audiences connect to the issues that define our time.

Now, News Ltd has a launched a initiative called One Degree where they plan to continue the two goals suggested by Murdoch.

The website provides information on what News Ltd is doing to tackle climate change. Information on what consumers can do in the areas of water, recycling, lifestyle and energy. In addition, links to Climate Change science and questions about its validity are provided. Every refresh of the webpage provides a fact regarding climate change. And the website is a refreshing blue colour.

To continue their goal of connecing their audiences to the issue, The Advertiser, a News Ltd paper for the state of South Australia will start a “A 10-part series, outlining the history and challenges of climate change and how readers can make a difference, will be published in coming weeks.” This series will start from 6th August in Adelaide for a period of two weeks. In addition, an Ad in the paper yesterday mentions that there will be daily tips in the paper.

I will be buying the paper from next week for the magazine and it will be interesting to wait and see the effect this has on the employees in my organization.

Globe-Net alerts to the release of the Top Sustainable Stocks (as any list this can be very subjective) by SustainableBusiness.com.

The list is based on “… a ‘preliminary universe’ of 50 global companies with strong “green” initiatives and solid financials, identified by KLD Research & Analytics, a provider of environmental, social and governance research and indexes.” The main characteristic of the list is that the company should be publicly traded, green it’s internal operations or grow a green business and should have good financials.

The Globe article is more informative as it divides the entire list into specific industry sectors.

• Energy Efficiency
• Renewable Energy
• Natural Resources: Water, Forests
• Green Building
• Consumer Products
• Natural Foods/ Natural Products

And a honourable mention to Google for a range of initiatives.

The June issue of FastCompany.com profiles Nau, the high end enviro-friendly clothing company started this year in the US by people who worked in Patagonia and Nike.

Polly LaBarre writes about the extraordinary ambitions and plans for Nau.

The presumption that business can, and that we can, is at the heart of a new enterprise emerging from that hotbed of green goodness, Portland, Oregon. To say that Nau (Maori for “Welcome! Come in”) is a new outdoor-clothing company would be a little like saying Starbucks started out just to sell a cup of joe. The ideas Nau promotes are as important as the clothes it sells.

Two and a half years ago, ideas were all Nau had. They took form in the heads of a small group of executives who had left big jobs at Patagonia and Nike to huddle together in the Urban Grind coffee shop in Portland’s Pearl District and dream. Based on a shared conviction that, in addition to generating profit, companies have an equal responsibility to create positive social and environmental change, the Nau team set out to reinvent the way people shop, reshape the outdoor category, redesign the corporation–and inspire the wider business community to do the same.

“Every element in our business is an opportunity to turn traditional business notions inside out.”
–Chris Van Dyke

Today, Nau is a business with three months of sales under its belt by way of the Web and four retail stores (in Boulder, Colorado; Portland; Chicago; and Bellevue, Washington), 92 people, $24 million raised in capital, and four clothing collections in various stages of production. The business plan projects $11 million in revenue this year, growing to $260 million and 150 stores by 2010.

As Patagonia has proved, Sustainability is like high end technology. It takes innovation, good design, high paying customers and a dedicated team to create a company like Nau.