Well, have you had a car accident?  Gotten really sick?  Been hospitalized?  Lose your house in a mudslide and will have to rebuild? Congratulations, you're doing good for the economy.  That doesn't sound so good to you? 

Last week, as part of a nationwide speaking tour sponsored by Anew New Zealand, Dr. Coleman briefly discussed the GPI in a candid interview, and then gave a thought provoking presentation on how the index might be used to predict disasters such as the economic meltdown we’re still wading our way through. 

• a decline in volunteerism (and negative social changes as a result),
• collapsing fish stocks after a record boom period (and subsequent loss of thousands of jobs in a key local industry),
• a steady decline of local farming economies (it’s no longer viable to work the fields, so farmers are inclined to sell land to developers),
• and the substantial growth of consumer debt versus income— and the financial crisis that followed. 

Using climate change as one example, what happens when a disastrous weather event causes havoc to the scale of what happened in New Orleans? Decades of economic gain in the form of infrastructure can be destroyed in a matter of just a few hours.   Even proponents of GDP should be able to see the logic: we need better measures and better decisions. 

From awareness around carbon footprints, to light sensors, to slow fashion, there's a lot to keep aware of in the year ahead.   Keep these 20 trends on your radar.

I saw conservationist David Bellamy speak earlier this week at Auckland University.  If you've never heard him deliver a talk before, he wanders a bit.  Okay more than a bit.  He delved into the mating habits of turtles and wandered across other highlights/stories from his extensive career in the field for nearly an hour.

Props to the guy, it certainly sounds like an interesting career filled with a wide range of conservation activities: from helping farmers in Australia to guiding the children of Nauru recover parts of their stripped island in foliage.  Restoring the wildflowers in England was the bit that gave me the warm fuzzies. 

He spoke quite strongly about the conservation ethic here in New Zealand and how over 4500 organisations in the country are "stitching their bit of the world back in order," restoring biodiversity.  Aww shucks. 

I was nodding along to everything I'd expect the guy to talk about.  Then came the bombshell.  "Climate change is poppycock."  I sat up in my chair blinking, wondering if the accent had gotten me, or if the man was talking through his beard a bit much.  No, he definitely said poppycock.

Well, that was my WTF?! moment of the day.  Now, I'm not going to go all Elizabeth Kolbert on the guy, but what is a patriarch of environmentalism doing spouting such drivel?  I'm not going to go on about the guy for 4 pages like Dr. Kolbert did towards Colin Beavan, (there's far better candidates for that sort of effort) but baby I've got an issue with this.

I'd expect this line of drivel from Rodney Hyde or a less than forward-thinking government.  I'd expect excuses like this from a coal company, or industry lobby group astroturfing their way around the place.  I would not expect this from a man who restores wildflowers in Britain.

And Mr. Bellamy's rationale for climate change being "poppycock", a problem not associated with human behaviour? 

Well he mumbled on another two minutes about volcano eruptions correlated to CO2 and temperature drop historically over time, and oh wait, he's got a graph somewhere he could show us, but he's not going to show us.  Plop back in chair, next question from the youth panel. 

Sorry buddy, that's just not on.  You do not stand on a otherwise legitimate career of doing good things to drop some misleading, unsubstantiated comment on a generation of people who is going to have to deal with the mess of global warming long after you've checked out.  It's bloody irresponsible and an insult to the people in developing countries already feeling the brunt of these shifts.

You can discuss the rate at which it's happening, explore the different consequences of human behaviour and the degree to which it might be affecting the bigger picture, but the reality is still the same: humans have a role in our current swing of the climate. 

Saying anything else but puts you not in the echelon of the people working to change things for the better, but in the dingy with the naysayers.  Check your conservation credentials at the door please.

I'm afraid I've lost much respect for a man with an otherwise noble career.  I can only hope it was early onset Alzheimer's doing the talking.

Also appears on Celsias.co.nz

According to critics "...TBL concept is that it is "inherently misleading -- the term itself promises or implies something it cannot deliver."  Has the time come to move on to a better way of reflecting the realities of business?

Last night at LATE at the Museum, we witnessed a spirited discussion from some very intelligent minds.  In a discussion focused on environmental and economic impacts of migration in a global age, eminent speakers Rod Oram (left) and Dr. John Merson (right) gave a worthwhile summary of how New Zealand is likely to stack up in the era ahead marked by climate change. 

Moderated by Finlay Macdonald (centre), the talk explored far more than the title suggested and delved into the complex economic, social, environmental, and political relationships that are pivotal to understand when addressing climate change.

In front of a standing room only crowd, Dr. Merson took a strong position that much of the challenge ahead lies in challenging our social norms and changing our everyday habits and views.  He noted that economics and the markets they spawn are directly responsible for the environmental consequences of what business does-- in many cases, the pollution/distruction of our environment.

Mr. Oram made the case that from a government point of view, market drivers play a big part in making change happen, which is why there has been contentious debate around the proposed Emissions Trading Scheme (or ETS).  While an ETS is only one part of the equation, Mr. Oram raised the point that we only pay attention to what we value, and if carbon has a measured value, it can be managed throughout business models. 

He gave a rather interesting snapshot of how this would be likely to effect New Zealand's prominant dairy industry: each year, according to Fonterra, for every litre of milk, 1 kg of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) are generated.  This amounts to a whopping 15 million tonnes of GHGs annually.  While attributing some cost to these GHGs has the farming industry up in arms squealing apocalypse, Mr. Oram seems to think they're missing the point.  Each kg of GHGs equates to wasted nutrients. 

If farmers could farm more efficently, close the loop on many of their farming practices, they could actually save an incredible amount of money in the longer term and manage their land better.  He noted that in New Zealand we have huge potential to be world leaders in redefining how ruminants are farmed, but our research budgets in this area to date have been really small.  We could be developing some leading technology and proprietary know-how, but so far have missed the bus. 

Dr. Merson, while optimistic to a point on technology helping save us, he noted that technology and ETS are just tools in a larger toolbox.  Markets are crtically important, but not the only tool, and unfortunately the main focus to date has been on mitigation of climate change effects.  Due to a 30 year lag time on emissions and the reality they present for us, time is not no our side.  The way we live is not sustainable and with each day that passes we are affecting the hroizon of what will face our children and grandchildren.  More than a reliance on mitigation is needed.  With it, the conversation turned more towards adaptation and some serious questions were raised. 

He noted that in the years ahead, a likely 1.5 metre rise in sea levels would take place, affecting many crowded population centres worldwide from New York to Bangkok.  What happens to all these people living coastally?  What are our moral implications in New Zealand?  Are we to take them in?  What is the scale of confrontation that we are facing?  He emphasised that we do not have the luxury of disconnecting ourselves globally from what is happening around us, and especially not from our neighbours on Pacific atolls.  Unfortunately, planning for this likely monumental shift in humanity in the coming years and the migratory challenges it suggests has barely surfaced on the radar of policy makers.

Mr. Oram confirmed that climate meetings later this year in Copenhagen are unlikely to yield a full blown climate treaty, but should hopefully help get countries worldwide on a better trajectory, especially if the U.S. is involved to any serious level.  Painfully absent at the Kyoto negotiations, U.S. involvement is critical to the adoption of any worldwide agreement as it amounts to a credible shift in values.

Quick to make sure that the emphasis was not left on governments to do all the work, Dr. Merson shifted footing to personal responsibility, and also noted that the time has come to move beyond functioning as independent nation states for issues that cross all international borders.  With or without governments, people around the world need to embrace the ideals of equity, mutuality, and interconnectedness.  As time is running out and we are already behind the 8-ball, it is of vital interest to take personal action, to lobby government, and to send signals to the market that a shift is needed. 

He cited several recent corporate incidents with GE and GM that have been in response to consumer behaviour and investor lobbying, as well as the Montreal Protocol on CFCs as success stories in how people have come together worldwide to make big shifts happen.

Confirming the position, Mr. Oram noted that governments follow people, and that we each must help drive the change forward.  We are going to need to get comfortable and excited about changing, understanding economic and social pressures, and get a better appreciation of the interdependence of the global scene.  Success in combating climate change will come with a significant movement of human ingenuity and creativity to tackle the problems we face. 

It was a really positive point to end with, and a really great segue to the rest of the evening's programming, which included musical appearances from New Zealand's Ladi6 (right) and King Kapisi.  It was some good food for thought with a positive soundtrack to help it all sink in. 

For more on upcoming events at Auckland Museum, check out www.lateatthemuseum.com

While a recent survey showed that 3 quarters of Americans believe something should be done about climate change, getting them off their butts to do anything is entirely another story.  Check out this interesting exploration of the psychology behind climate change on Solve Climate.  The most interesting excerpt from the article that we found:

At the heart of the challenge is reframing the issue. Frames are “mental structures that shape the way we see the world,” explains George Lakoff, a professor of cognitive linguistics at the University of California-Berkeley.

Reframing an issue doesn’t just mean using a different set of terms, such as “deteriorating atmosphere” instead of “global warming” — it’s a much more comprehensive shift in perspective. When targeting a specific audience, climate change needs to be reframed according to the values and concerns of that particular group.

To reach the broader public, Lakoff stresses eight concepts that need to be repeated over and over until they are part of the public’s common understanding.

• We are all part of nature — it is not outside of us, and the destructive exploitation of nature is evil. “Nature has been seen as a resource for people’s short term gain rather than as a nurturer for us and for future generations. But it is part of us … it is inside of us as we breathe the air, drink the water and eat our food,” Lakoff said.

• The economic and ecological meltdowns have the same root — the idea that unregulated greed is good.

• The ecological system is a global one that is affected by many different elements. Thus people need to realize that their actions might cause climate change effects in other parts of the world, and that what happens in other parts of the world can affect us as well.

• The right wing’s argument that it will cost too much to save Earth is faulty; if Earth goes, business goes.

• It is not just the polar bears that are endangered – all of human existence is threatened

• We all own the air, and corporations are polluting our air; they need to be stopped.

• Even the most effective emissions cap will not be sufficient; large corporations need to join the effort.

• The cost-benefit analysis is the wrong paradigm for thinking about global warming because it is only accurate when calculating short-term gain for a given purpose. It cannot calculate the long-term value of sustainable measures.

And from Grist, Adam D. Sacks argues that the solution to climate change lies not with science or carbon targets, but with changing cultural attitudes and behaviour.  We tend to agree with his line of thinking:

In the 20 years since we climate activists began our work in earnest, the state of the climate has become dramatically worse, and the change is accelerating—this despite all of our best efforts.  Clearly something is deeply wrong with this picture.  What is it that we do not yet know?  What do we have to think and do differently to arrive at urgently different outcomes?^[1]

The answers lie not with science, but with culture.

Climate activists are obsessed with greenhouse-gas emissions and concentrations.  Since global climate disruption is an effect of greenhouse gases, and a disastrous one, this is understandable.  But it is also a mistake.

Such is the fallacy of climate activism^[2]: We insist that global warming is merely a consequence of greenhouse-gas emissions. Since it is not, we fail to tell the truth to the public.

I think that there are two serious errors in our perspectives on greenhouse gases:

The first error is our failure to understand that greenhouse gases are not a cause but a symptom, and addressing the symptom will do little but leave us with a devil’s sack full of many other symptoms, possibly somewhat less rapidly lethal but lethal nonetheless.

...

The second error is our stubborn unwillingness to understand that the battle against greenhouse-gas emissions, as we have currently framed it, is over.

From there Mr. Sacks starts getting quite contraversial.  We'd highly recommend reading on.

While small and land-strapped, the busy metropolis of Singapore actually has a countryside.  Kranji is an area located just 30 minutes outside the city center, well outside the radar of the casual tourist.  Far from the urban high rise cityscape, it hosts everything from military barracks to fish farms to wildlife parks. 

It is a place where people go to escape city life and experience a Singapore less ordinary.  Nestled in this green corner of the country is a place known as Bollywood Veggies.  If you’ve heard of the place, you know of its owner Ivy Singh-Lim.  And if you’ve heard of Ivy, you know she’s a firecracker-- a local legend. 

A conversation with this activist will leave you inspired, challenged, perhaps a bit offended, but definitely refreshed.  For a 60 year-old woman, Ivy possesses more energy than most apathetic people two generations younger.  I dropped in to check out their 10 acre organic farm and bistro eatery and got more than I bargained for.

Over a glass of ice water in the sweltering heat, Ivy tells her story.  “My second husband and I met and got married in 3 days.  Twenty-seven years later we are still trying to decide who was drunk and who was desperate,” she laughs, her eyes engaged firmly the whole time. 

“We were both running businesses.  I was the child of a rich landowner family who owned large tracts of property.  Whether by family background or career choice, I could have chosen to retire and not do much,” she says.  (continues)

We’re in strange times, and they could get a lot stranger. How do you plan for the unknowable? Check out this article by Chris Tobias from Idealog Magazine.

Singapore is a bustling city state at the southern tip of peninsular Malaysia.  Independent from Malaysia since 1965, it has a dense population of 4.7 million people crammed into 269 sq. miles (697 sq. km)—  that’s roughly 3.5x the size of Washington D.C. 

In spite of its lacking land mass, the tiny country is a major economic hub in Southeast Asia and boasts one of the best standards of living of any Asian city, and even rivals many metropolis overseas. 

It’s a city that is well planned, tightly regulated, visually attractive, and thankfully lacking the woeful pollution that afflict other centers like Hong Kong and Shanghai.   

Waste and the City

All the economic activity and large population of course is not without its downside: waste.  In 2008 the total volume of solid waste had reached 5.97 million tons.  Luckily, according to government figures, roughly 2.24 million tons (approx. 56%) of this was recycled.  That still left a lot left to deal with.  (continues)

The Netherlands has a reputation for being progressive, from the environment to social initiatives.  About twice the size of New Jersey, a large proportion of its landmass is below sea level.  Protected (at least for the moment) by an elaborate system of dikes, the country is a center of creativity, efficiency, and diversity.  It’s a place that is open-minded and broad thinking on everything from social programs to wind energy.  A recent trip to Amsterdam also unveiled it is equally creative with its approach to waste management and water reclamation.  (continues)

This updates a previous story about the Poh Ern Shih Temple in Singapore)

One year after opening, and about two years after construction began, the Poh Ern Shih Temple (or Temple of Thanksgiving in English) is looking great.  I’m dropping by to visit the temple and check out progress on this green Buddhist sanctuary. 

The place is bustling with activity, and thankfully the first phase of construction has now been completed.  On the day of my visit, several different religious study groups are in session upstairs, catering to the younger members of the Buddhist congregation.  I locate Boon, the temple president, just before lunch and we sit down for a chat.

“The building performance has been great,” he tells me.  “We’ve generated 15 megawatts of power from our first phase PV systems so far in the first year, and we’re going to install another set in our second phase of construction.”   (continues)

This updates an earlier blog entry on defining progress.  ANew NZ and Statistics NZ released their report from the workshops held across the country in a report entitled "Measuring New Zealand’s Progress Using a Sustainable Development Approach: 2008", now available on their website.  In a nutshell, the report, "presents an overarching view of New Zealand’s environmental, economic, and social progress and whether that progress was consistent with sustainable development. The selected indicators provide information about whether we are meeting our current needs, how our resources are distributed, how efficiently we are using our resources, and what impact our actions may have on the stock of resources that will be available in the future."

Richard Heinberg, author of "The Party's Over" and "Peak Everything" has a really worthwhile newsletter I'd suggest subscribing to.  This month, he (surprisingly!) offers a lot of good news.  On the list:

World energy consumption is declining.

CO₂ emissions are falling.

Consumption of goods is falling.

Globalization is in reverse (global trade is shrinking).

The number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is falling.

There are fewer cars on the road.

The world’s over-leveraged, debt-based financial system is failing.

Gardening is going gonzo.

While many of these factors are due to recession, the positive side is that we're getting the opportunity to reconsider so many of the structures we have in our way of life, and have the opportunity to change them for the better.  Take a moment to check out the rest of what Richard has to say. 

(originally appearing on Celsias.com)

For those interested in the "sustainability space" (interpret how you wish), you might find the thoughts of John Thackara quite refreshing.  He runs an international conference and knowledge network called Doors of Perception which sets new agendas for design.  John is also the author of the book "In the Bubble: Designing in a Complex World".  Personally, I think the man is a genius.

Both his newsletters and blog feature a headrush of inspiring material (warning, take in small doses!).  In a somewhat recent post   he delves into many of the same issues that we cover here on Celsias.  For some food for thought, I've taken the liberty of posing a few excerpts here.  Consider it mid-week mind exercise.  Enjoy, and I'd be curious to hear your reactions and thoughts around these issues:

] Introduction: measuring what matters

“These are my principles. If you don’t like them, I have others”. Groucho Marx could also have been talking about environmental standards. Our world is awash in eco information, but starved of meaning. Hundreds of organisations churn out a flood of reports, graphs, studies, punditry – and lists.

So many lists! I'm supposed to be an expert on sustainability, but it still gives me a headache trying to keep track of the Triple Bottom Line; the Three Main Components (and Four System Conditions) of The Natural Step; One Planet Living's Ten Guiding Principles; the World Wildlife Fund's Three Forms of Solidarity; the Copenhagen Agenda's Ten Principles for Sustainable City Governance; the Framework of Eight Doorways of the Sustainable Schools Network; the 12 Indicators To Follow of the Earth Policy Institute; the 11 Indicators of a Sustainable City (developed by Montreal); and the Ten Hanover Principles promulgated by Bill McDonough.

Each list is the result of deep thought by smart and dedicated people - and there are doubtless other important to-do lists out there that I've missed. But can we please agree: enough already?

The pervasive tendency of politicians to dissemble adds to the uncertainty. Vague promises to use "as few natural resources as possible," "reduce waste to a minimum" or deliver the "greenest Olympics planned so far" amplifies our feelings of anxiety that not enough is being done - and that what is being done, is not being done fast enough.

How do we measure "sustainable"? What is the benchmark? How far is it from here, to there? And how long do we have to get there?

In the transition towards a more balanced economy and society, we probably do have to take numbers and metrics seriously. And if a well-engineered new economic system is needed, we probably need it to be more like a German car than an Italian one.

But this is not to say that numbers are all that matters. On the contrary, we a new synthesis of metrics and aesthetics. The what *and* the why are equally important.

(continues...)

Also appearing on Celsias.com, check out this hot off the press interview with David Holmgren: 
 

[Chris Tobias, Editor of Celsias] David, I just wanted to take a moment first to thank you for living such an inspiring, creative, and explorative life.  I've been very interested in permaculture for the last few years, and I'm keen to discuss many of the themes that have emerged in your latest book, Future Scenarios: How Communities to Adapt to Peak Oil and Climate Change.

The book is really great concise reference.  Thank you for not providing another 500 page thesis on either climate change or peak oil.  Your treatment is really thoughtful and well analysed.  Digging into the material, what I found really enlightening was your take on the challenges of climate change and peak oil to be ones that can have particularly positive results. 

Most people view these factors in a very "gloom and doom/the world is going to end" sort of way.  Perhaps you can elaborate on some of your thoughts from the book?

[David Holmgren] Permaculture arose out of the limits of resources and unsustainability of society 30 years ago.  People could have come to permaculture for a variety of reasons over the years.  Since the 1970s, Bill Mollison and I have been very touched by Club of Rome, the ongoing oil crisis, environmental impact issues, global food crisis, and how we narrowly averted catastrophes on so many occasions. 

A lot of these issues dating back to the 70's were largely swept under the carpet in 1980s and it no longer became acceptable to talk about "limits to growth".  Later climate change became the galvanizing issue for the environmental movement, rather than just running out of resources.  For me, over that long term, getting a better understanding that these things are taking place has meant I restructured what I believe in.  I've changed my focus around the more positive outcomes will result from these inevitable shifts. 

It works on two levels.  One can change their own life in taking these issues as  "Normal" (e.g. a world of scarce resources), become more self sufficient, and start doing things with nature rather than focusing on technological solutions.  Through that process, you gradually become more comfortable with those realities becoming the norm.  So actually the things we have been talking about, such as food being grown more locally for example, will become both economically and environmentally necessary.  These trends make me comfortable. 

Looking at the numbers, even if we were living with a 10^th of the resources we have now, we would be better off than many of our recent ancestors, and maybe even relatives several generations ago.  There is the opportunity to bring back many patterns of human behavior that have served us well for centuries.  While the changes ahead of us could be quite challenging, some many good things can come out of it. 

For example, the sense of community: decreased mobility and high energy cost will lead to people talking to their neighbours again... even if it is because they can't get away from it!  Challenges will mean that people have to look out for each other.  Real community isn't a "utopian" thing, it is a really basic thing... it is a normal human state.

(continues)

Well, for those of you geoengineering hacks who are keen on biochar, this week provided no lack of entertainment!   Quite an uproar took place in UK based newspaper the Guardian.  George Monbiot took aim at biochar   and its promise to sequester carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.  No holds barred either:

"Sorry, not charcoal. We don't call it that any more. Now we say biochar. The idea is that wood and crop wastes are cooked to release the volatile components (which can be used as fuel), then the residue - the charcoal - is buried in the soil. According to the magical thinkers who promote it, the new miracle stops climate breakdown, replaces gas and petroleum, improves the fertility of the soil, reduces deforestation, cuts labour, creates employment, prevents respiratory disease and ensures that when you drop your toast it always lands butter side up. (I invented the last one, but give them time)."

Toast landing butter side up?  If only!  He went on to pick, poke, and prod biochar for a few more paragraphs, and implicated a few heavyweight proponents...
(read the rest on Celsias.com)

While the credit crunch has taken its toll, 2009 will still be a great year for clean technologies-- this, from the 2009 Clean Energy Report just released this week.  Some key findings according to Clean Edge Research:

• Biofuels (global production and wholesale pricing of ethanol and biodiesel) reached $34.8 billion in 2008 and are projected to grow to $105.4 billion by 2018. In 2008 the global biofuels market consisted of more than 17 billion gallons of ethanol and 2.5 billion gallons of biodiesel production worldwide. For the first time, ethanol leader Brazil got more than 50 percent of its total national automobile transportation fuels from bioethanol, eclipsing petroleum use for the first time in any major market.
  
  
• Wind power (new installation capital costs) is projected to expand from $51.4 billion in 2008 to $139.1 billion in 2018. Last year's global wind power installations reached a record 27,000 MW. In the U.S., which accounted for more than 8,000 MW, wind installations represented more than 40 percent of total new electricity generating capacity brought online in 2008 – and moved the U.S. ahead of Germany as the world's leading generator of wind energy.
  
  
• Solar photovoltaics (including modules, system components, and installation) will grow from a $29.6 billion industry in 2008 to $80.6 billion by 2018. Annual installations reached more than 4 GW worldwide in 2008, four times the total set just four years earlier, when the solar PV market reached the 1 GW milestone for the first time in 2004
  

Together, we project these three benchmark technologies, which equaled $75.8 billion in 2007 and expanded 50 percent to $115.9 billion in 2008, to grow to $325.1 billion within a decade.

Total Investments Reach $155 Billion

Through the miracle of hydroponics, we now have this:

A house that is alive.  It's official, you've now seen everything.  Keep reading...

Circulated by our friends at Natural Path Media, here is a lot to be hopeful about:

• Consumers are increasingly aligning their purchases with their values.  According to a recent report by BBMG, 9 in 10 Americans agree that the term "conscious consumer" describes them well.
• A November 2008 Economist survey of managers and senior executives (sponsored by Cisco, HP, Qualcomm and SAS) found that Corporate citizenship is viewed as becoming increasingly important for the long-term health of their companies.
• A McKinsey Quarterly survey found that companies with a strong position in the green market may be able to better protect their market share from competitors. Large brand advertisers have discovered that Moms, which pour $1.7 billion into the US economy each year, are especially receptive to cause marketing.
• A recent survey conducted by Millard Brown found that both women without children (86.4%) and moms (85.6%) feel it's important for companies to support causes and charities and an overwhelming (97.3%) of corporate marketers believed that cause branding is a valid business strategy.
• The Hartman Group's latest report, "Sustainability: The Rise of Consumer Responsibility", gives further support that consumers aren't throwing out the (green) baby with the (economic decline) bathwater. The survey represents the latest report that shows environmental responsibility not going away during these difficult economic times. In particular, the report found more than 75 percent consider environmental and social aspects in deciding what to buy and about a third are willing to pay more for those benefits.
• A recent and very comprehensive report, published this January 09 by The Boston Consulting Group, concludes this question with a resounding Yes: consumers will continue to seek out green products, despite the economy.
• The Boston Consulting Group (BCG, just issued an extensive report: "Capturing the Green Advantage Consumer Companies". The BCG report, based on interviews with 9,000 consumers in North America, Europe, China, and Japan and other research, found that consumers bought more green goods in 2008 than they did in 2007 and that many "consumers greatly value the direct benefits that green products offer, such as superior freshness and taste, the promise of safety and health, and savings on energy costs."  The BCG report found that consumers were willing to pay higher prices for green products deemed to be of high quality.

Ecostore Founder Malcolm Rands also said this week at a speech in Auckland that in general, people were gravitating towards environmentally and fairly traded products because, in a world of financial fall outs and corporate spin, these brands had promises that they could believe in.

From John Bielenberg:

“All along the way, people were inspired not just by the act itself, but by how this grassroots effort was conceived and executed. It’s an example of how the process of thinking wrong can lead to something that doesn’t feel wrong at all.”

Not only does thinking wrong often not feel wrong, contends Bielenberg, it may just be the most effective means of doing right.

“The more diverse minds you have working on something, the more opportunity there is to make connections that one individual or one discipline wouldn’t make. In the activity of problem-solving on these big issues of sustainability and climate change, I think you need that diverse expertise in the room. Getting out of your comfort zone is where the really cool ideas come from.”

And designers have an important seat at the table.

“This is where we are very different from a think tank or an institute that considers the issues and writes white papers. Designers like to make stuff. It’s not just the idea generation, it’s the rapid prototyping, the execution, the bringing these ideas to life.”

Old economy hacks and stalewarts of business as usual take note: Forward thinking companies outperform in the current economic crisis.  As it turns out, focus on value, the big picture, and long term growth, as well as social conscience aren't a bad thing afterall.  Who knew?  But don't take our word for it... the Financial Times had this to say:

We see things differently. The downturn will produce more integrated, strategic and value-creating sustainability efforts in many companies. While traditional corporate responsibility and philanthropic initiatives may suffer, core elements of the sustainability agenda will survive or even thrive in a re-ordered economy.

In other news, a landmark global warming lawsuit was settled this week setting a legal precedent that funding dirty polluting business can leave you with a big liability.  And at last, someone has mapped out the relationships between all the organisations pushing for change.  It is called the "Gort Cloud".  Interesting findings, albeit the awkward name.

As seen on Springwise:

Breaking a bad habit is never easy, but a little support can help. Much like Green Thing, which we wrote about back in 2007, Green Groove is a site that aims to help consumers create and stick to a plan to eliminate their unsustainable ways and embrace new, greener habits.

Green Groove's goal is to help consumers make "a phased withdrawal on catastrophic climate change." Toward that end, the Idaho-based site invites visitors to take three initial steps to create their own, personal withdrawal plan. First, they choose their desired plan type, length and level of difficulty, including whether it's just a personal plan or one that incorporates a household or family. Next, the site guides visitors to select specific weekly goals in four categories: auto, diet, home and lifestyle. Within the "home" category, for example, weekly goals might include replacing one old lightbulb with a compact fluorescent, or hang-drying at least one load of laundry. Third, visitors are then invited to put their weekly goals into the order they'd like to follow in accomplishing them, thereby creating their step-by-step action plan. A downloadable "Goal Tracker" widget is available both for Mac and PC, as are "Green Groove Participant" and "Green Groove Certified" website badges for those who are in the midst of or have finished their plans.

With all the many external demands on consumers' time and attention today, the need for support in making lifestyle changes seems greater than ever. Deliver that help in bite-sized portions, and you may just win some lasting support yourself! (Related: Nagging service for dieters — A public incentive to stick to one's goals.)

Website: www.greengroove.org
Contact: support@greengroove.org

A brief, 3 minute video that pretty much sums up the state of the world.  Brilliantly done.

Spotted on the Moxie blog...

"The sustainability debate has been positioned all wrong - as an environmental problem, as something business needs to account for, a risk to be managed or a tax to be paid. The business community has been going along with this to an extent, but it doesn’t sit well. And now, in a volatile global economy and competitive environment, sustainability is being pushed aside as a luxury while business focuses on efficiencies, and the bolder ones look to innovate their way out of recession.

But it’s not an and/or situation. The answer is and/and. Sustainability 1.0 - compliance, CSR, reduction, limits, is over. Sustainability 2.0 is here. Sustainability 2.0 is an outcome-focused all encompassing approach. It’s a process that builds prosperous businesses creating innovative products and services; businesses founded on good financial results, responsible use of resources, and community well‐being."

Sustainability 2.0?  Sounds like an upgrade for virus prone Microsoft.  In computer language, they call this sort of thing a kludge.  Its a clunky, technical fix to get around something that wasn't right to begin with.  Everyone has a different understanding of "sustainability" anyway.  By only increasing the complexity of language with the "2.0", we only talk to our group that much more-- rather than branching out with language that the rest of the world can understand.

Isn't this whole thing about dreaming what we want the future to be, consciously designing a plan to achieve it, and taking practical steps to move the whole thing Forward?  I'm with the spirit of this, not to be overcritical, but in terms of conveying the meaning, sustainability isn't ringing enough bells to begin with, and adding 2.0 only makes it a bit more convoluted to any outsider.

Here's a really great interview with the legend of the environmental movement, James Lovelock.  The full version can be found here in the New Scientist.  Some highlights:
On Carbon Emissions...

"Do we have time to do a similar thing with carbon emissions to save ourselves from climate change?

Not a hope in hell. Most of the "green" stuff is verging on a gigantic scam. Carbon trading, with its huge government subsidies, is just what finance and industry wanted. It's not going to do a damn thing about climate change, but it'll make a lot of money for a lot of people and postpone the moment of reckoning."

On Survival...
"Do you think we will survive?
I'm an optimistic pessimist. I think it's wrong to assume we'll survive 2 °C of warming: there are already too many people on Earth. At 4 °C we could not survive with even one-tenth of our current population. The reason is we would not find enough food, unless we synthesised it. Because of this, the cull during this century is going to be huge, up to 90 per cent. The number of people remaining at the end of the century will probably be a billion or less. It has happened before: between the ice ages there were bottlenecks when there were only 2000 people left. It's happening again.  I don't think humans react fast enough or are clever enough to handle what's coming up. Kyoto was 11 years ago. Virtually nothing's been done except endless talk and meetings.

It's a depressing outlook.

Not necessarily. I don't think 9 billion is better than 1 billion. I see humans as rather like the first photosynthesisers, which when they first appeared on the planet caused enormous damage by releasing oxygen - a nasty, poisonous gas. It took a long time, but it turned out in the end to be of enormous benefit. I look on humans in much the same light. For the first time in its 3.5 billion years of existence, the planet has an intelligent, communicating species that can consider the whole system and even do things about it. They are not yet bright enough, they have still to evolve quite a way, but they could become a very positive contributor to planetary welfare."

Sobering words, but it does make you look at things from the widest view possible.  We are on a rock spinning around the sun that's been here for millions of years.  Humans, while we like to think of ourselves quite centrically, are really small peanuts in the scheme of things.  I'd reckon any solutions we shoot for should really keep this reality in mind.  Though, how realistic might that really be...

Courtesy Dan Gould at PSFK (see also the rather inspiring Havas link):

Umair Haque, the director of the Havas Media Lab shares five questions (and possible answers) he believes can generate valuable insights on how to thrive as a business in the sometimes dizzying world of the 21st century. Haque says that to mitigate the effects of the gloomy economic future, people need to radically change assumed operating procedures and re-wire the fundamental ways they do business. He discusses how to manage a world based on decreasing consumption and how to build on two-way value chains such as the member submitted culture of Threadless.

He explains:

Tomorrow will not be like yesterday. This is no mere recession: it’s a tectonic global shift in savings, consumption, and investment. Today’s macropocalypse is a rupture in the global economic fabric - and the next half-decade will be spent reweaving it. It is not a temporary departure from business as usual, an illness - it is a structural transformation, a lasting change.

20th century business isn’t fit for 21st century economics. Yesterday’s businesses were built for a world of overconsumption, artificially cheap production, symmetrical competition, and macroeconomic stability. That was yesterday. Today, the herd of industrial-era dinosaurs is going to be mercilessly culled - unless they can evolve to fit a radically altered economic environment.

Harvard Business: “A User’s Guide to 21st Century Economics”

It's not quite as sleep as the Micro Compact Home, but for reused material factor, local manufacture, portability, and composting loo (not to mention Kiwi ingenuity), we give it some big points.  Introducing Port-a-Bach.  Put all those retired shipping containers to good use.  Nice Work!

Thought I'd share this cross post from Celsias.  Happy New Year everyone.

As I think many would agree, 2008 was full of challenges, from food shortages, to accelerated climate change, oil price spikes, to economic downturns, a lot is categorically going-to be honest-quite crap in the world.  But in spite of all this, I actually think 2008 was a damn good year, and I'm extremely thrilled for 2009.  Allow me to connect the dots... (continues)

Courtesy of Professor Stuart B. Hill, Foundation Chair of Social Ecology, School of Education, University of Western Sydney.  

Because of the holistic nature of the approach being advocated, all of the areas below overlap & are highly interactive & interrelated. This was written in response to the Commonwealth Government’s announcement of the Australia 2020 Summit in Canberra, ACT (19-20 April, 2008: http://www.australia2020.gov.au/). 

What will those clever Europeans come up with next?  An all inclusive, all supporting, erm... box... to live in.  With a catchy marketing tagline of "Less stuff, more nature" the Micro Compact Home (or M-CH) provides all of life's basics in a tiny footprint, both in terms of size (2.6m²) as well as resource consumption.  It's sleek, insulated shape means that it uses very little energy, and can even be powered by a solar panel mounted to the mast.  I'm not sure why I find efficiency so undeniably sexy, but M-CH is mine if they ever start shipping to New Zealand.  Check out more specs on the Micro Compact Home website. 

The Green Boom - contributed by Kirk Serpes, originally appearing in Solar Action Bulletin

It’s safe to say that most people, myself included, were more than satisfied with the number of global crisis requiring our immediate and undivided attention.   Most of us were more than happy just dealing with the climate, energy, food and political crisis, and would be too for quite some time into the future. But of course, Christmas came early this year with the collapse of the Wall Street and an economic crisis comparable of Great Depression.   Of course, very few actually understand the problem and even fewer understand (in real detail) how it all happened.  (continues)

This fantastic 47 minute long video gives an easy to digest summary of the financial crisis that faces us in the world today.  If you wonder where money comes from, how it has been mismanaged, and the changes that really need to take place, you'll find this video an eye-opener.  No economics degree necessary-- just a desire to understand what this crisis means for the world and your well-being.  I saw  this yesterday evening at an event at T Karnaga Gallery on K' Road courtesy of Sassy and Rongomai at www.Mindcontrol.co.nz.  Thanks for the fantastic event guys!

The video in 5 parts is available courtesy of YouTube:

(continues)

I just finished reading a damn good book entitled "How to live off-grid" by Nick Rosen.  The author also has a comprehensive website available here: http://www.off-grid.net/ (continues)

HR, recruitment, and management take note: while there is hype worldwide that the green jobs revolution is going to change the workforce, there is also the growing realisation that it isnt going to happen overnight.  Paul Hannam of Bright Green Recruitment has worked in the industry for over 20 years and identified the following barriers to the development of the Green Economy (note: while this is written from a US/UK perspective, some of the trends hold true worldwide, especially for multinational companies):

(continues)

Two new leads picked up by our friends at Springwise:

First-- gym bunnies be excited-- you can now generate electricity by working out.  Absolutely wicked idea.  Turn those calories into kilowatts. 

And for all those looking to lower your carbon footprint, it would be really great if some local foodstores or farms picked up on this idea: local deliveries of organic produce by bike.  Not only can you order online from the comfort of your inner sanctum, but then you have someone else do the pedal power and bring your broccoli to your door!  

(Of course, you would need this service as you would be quite busy pumping iron to make your own electricity...)

Just launched this week: http://www.ecoevents.org.nz/

Quite a useful tool for the Auckland region specialising in local environmental events.  It is easy to post your own to the site.  Also, they have some funding leads for people looking for $$$ to get their project off the ground.  It's a great idea, but one request ARC: perhaps you can work with other councils to make similar happen nationwide. 

Check it out people!