World Economic Forum Launches Today: Toby Heaps Is There
The World Economic Forum launches today in Davos, Switzerland and Corporate Knights editor Toby Heaps is there along with our publisher, Karen Kun. Follow Corporate Knights Forum as Toby posts his journal on this year’s proceedings. Global warming is a major topic at this year’s conference:
With 17 sessions on climate change, this year’s Annual Meeting will be one of the “greenest” ever at Davos. Dominic Waughray, Head of Environmental Initiatives at the Forum, says “We are getting huge demand from our members to place climate change and issues of environmental security at the very heart of the programme of the World Economic Forum. The companies represented at the Annual Meeting have a combined turnover of about US$ 10 trillion—nearly a quarter of global GDP—so catalysing their deeper engagement in this issue can only be a good thing for all of us.”
What is the World Economic Forum? Here is the Wikipedia’s introduction:
According to its supporters, the World Economic Forum is an ideal place for dialogue and debate regarding the major social and economic problems of the planet, since representatives of both the most powerful economic organisations and the most powerful political organisations are present, since intellectuals also participate, and since there is a generally informal atmosphere encouraging wide-ranging debate. Journalists have access to every session at the Annual Meeting in Davos and the majority of sessions are webcast live so that the debates can be open to a wider public. In all about 600 journalists from print, radio and TV take part in the meeting. Whilst business and political leaders make up the majority of participants, NGO leaders from groups such as Amnesty International, Transparency International, Oxfam and various UN organisations attend, as well as trades union leaders and religious leaders.
Receding glaciers like this Baffin Island piedmont are evidence that the world’s climate is changing—Canadians are worried.
Angus Reid, the polling company, announced today that the issue most concerning Canadians is the environment. Well, tell us something we didn’t know. The main stream press has so many stories about sustainability these days that the venerable Canadian news institution, The Globe and Mail, should rename itself, “The Global Warming Report.” Take a look at today’s paper and count the environment related stories. See what I mean?
Getting back to the Angus Reid story—today they made public this research: 19% of us are concerned with health care while 35% think the environment is our most important concern. Ten years ago the environment would not have even made the top ten let alone number one. Here are the numbers:
The Environment
35%
Health Care
19%
Tax Relief
10%
Poverty
7%
Crime
6%
The Economy
6%
Maybe these polling results are caused by quantifiable data like this:
“Miami, New Orleans Face Warming Threat," CBS News/Associated Press, March 23, 2006: “By the end of this century, Arctic temperatures could reach as high as 130,000 years ago, when the oceans were 13 to 20 feet higher than now, according to research appearing in Friday’s issue of the journal Science.”
We have a pop quiz for all our green news aware readers: What do chemical giant DuPont, aluminum producer Alcan, heavy-machinery company Caterpillar, and and BP’s U.S. subsidiary all have in common? . . .
If you said they all pay “experts” to deny that global warming exists you’d be wrong - at least for this question. Want to try again?
O.K., O.K., you’re never going to get this. Those four giant companies are part of a new group called the “United States Climate Action Partnership (USCAP).” Their plan is to reduce greenhouse gasses by 10-30 percent over the next fifteen years.
Now, as startling and perhaps unexpected as that is what is really remarkable about the news is that they are urging U.S. President George W. Bush—you know, the guy who systematically purged the Federal Government of its pro-environment voices—to do something about global warming. And they are doing it on the eve of the President Bush’s “State of the Nation” address. If your jaw just hit the floor we can wait a minute while you compose yourself. (Wait, if Stephen Harper can have a green epiphany then maybe it is not that surprising.)
What is even more unexpected is that global warming denier Exxon Corporation is cutting back its funding for anti-global warming propaganda. At least according to the Independent Newspaper:
The age of global warming denial, meanwhile, also appears to be drawing to a close. Exxon Mobil, the world’s largest oil company, has cut its funding to groups who argue global warming is a hoax, and is now working to develop strategies it can accept for emissions reduction.
That’s a huge change from just a few months ago, when Exxon Mobil’s chief executive, Lee Raymond, arguably the world’s most prominent global warming sceptic, was still at the helm, and the Senate Energy Committee was headed by the Oklahoma Republican James Inhofe, who made it his business to dismiss scientific opinion on climate change as a conspiracy.
Humour aside for a moment, these kinds of bureaucratic organizations will hold corporations to their promise of a sustainable future. In fact, the ISO system probably has done more to entrench the idea of sustainability in manufacturing than any thousand green lectures on the future of the planet. That’s just the way engineering-driven companies work. So, let’s applaud this move on the part of big companies and do our best to keep this momentum going.
Here is the USCAP mission statement from their recent press release:
Our goal is to help our nation create public policy that would act aggressively and sustainably to slow, stop and reverse the growth of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Toward this end, USCAP urges lawmakers to enact a policy framework for mandatory reductions of GHG emissions from major emitting sectors, including large stationary sources, transportation, and energy use in commercial and residential buildings. The cornerstone of this approach would be a cap-and-trade program. The environmental goal is to reduce global atmospheric GHG concentrations to a level that minimizes large-scale adverse impacts to humans and the natural environment. The group recommends Congress provide leadership and establish short- and mid-term emission reduction targets; a national program to accelerate technology research, development and deployment; and approaches to encourage action by other countries, including those in the developing world, as ultimately the solution must be global.
These are complicated problems. There must be a reasoned and serious debate about the solutions. But debate cannot substitute for action. We hope that the consensus we have reached through our unique partnership provides further impetus toward the creation of sensible and effective policies to
(...read more...)
As a kid, I remember how Alberta tar sands pioneers were ridiculed. Sure, Canada had the world’s largest known reserves of crude oil locked in its soil, but it would consume more in energy to recover than it was worth. Then came fifty dollar a barrel oil and the world changed. In spite of the huge amounts of natural gas needed to separate oil from sand and the colossal volumes of carbon dioxide generated by the process, the environmental destruction on a massive scale this recovery causes is profitable - very profitable. As long, that is, if you don’t factor in the true cost of the process.
For example, those eastern Canadians who have warmed their homes with natural gas during the formerly long, cold northern winters now have to compete with the tar sands industry for their energy supply. Notice your gas bills going up recently? Get accustomed to it. In a market-driven energy environment it is more righteous to burn clean natural gas to recover dirty, second-rate oil than it is to preserve a scarce, irreplaceable commodity for the national good. Is that environmental short-sitedness sustainable? You’re kidding me if you need an answer to that question.
Take a look at the above satellite photo of the tar sands recovery site outside of Fort McMurray. The process requires vast amounts of water which is used and then released into the environment. The Wikipedia explains the process this way:
After excavation, hot water and caustic soda (NaOH) is added to the sand, and the resulting slurry is piped to the extraction plant where it is agitated and the oil skimmed from the top. Oil Sands Discovery Centre Provided that the water chemistry is appropriate to allow bitumen to separate from sand and clay, the combination of hot water and agitation releases bitumen from the oil sand, and allows small air bubbles to attach to the bitumen droplets. The bitumen froth floats to the top of separation vessels, and is further treated to remove residual water and fine solids.
Vast quantities of fresh water are used then discarded onto the landscape as part of this process. The environmental impact? I’ll leave the last words to the Wikipedia:
Oil sands development has a direct impact on local and planetary ecosystems. In Alberta, the strip mining form of oil extraction destroys the boreal forest, the bogs, the rivers as well as the natural landscape. The mining industry believes that the boreal forest will eventually colonize the reclaimed lands, yet 30 years after the opening of the first open pit mine near Fort McMurray, Alberta, no land is considered by the Alberta Government as having been reclaimed.
For every barrel of synthetic oil produced in Alberta, 80 kg of greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere. About 5-10% of the two to four barrels of water used for processing is considered as wastewater. The forecast growth in synthetic oil production in Alberta threatens Canada’s international commitments. In ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, Canada agreed to reduce, by 2012, its greenhouse gas emissions by 6% with respect to the reference year (1990). In 2002, Canada’s total greenhouse gas emissions had increased by 24% since 1990. However, it is widely reported that many other countries in the world will not meet their commitments either. Also, many countries, such as China, India, USA and Australia are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol.
Gordon Stratford’s sketches for HOK’s new, LEEDs certified office on Toronto’s King Street West.
Toronto architecture firm HOK recently moved into its new offices on King Street West. Big deal, right? Well, it is a big deal. HOK’s commitment to sustainable practices is setting new standards for green office design in the city. Their experience achieving a coveted “Gold” LEEDs rating for the office is detailed by Metropolis Magazine. The designers—who have long dealt with issues of sustainable development—are helping others imagine and create environmentally sound businesses:
Yet HOK has found that its clients are the most important audience for the space--not because of aesthetics, but because of environmental principles. Rather than advertise their design savvy with the typical architect’s corporate cool--all Barcelona chairs and travertine--HOK throws its significant corporate heft behind the “triple bottom line”: how sustainability benefits business, society, and the planet. What the firm has found is that the conversation often stretches beyond architecture. “We’re talking with our clients about what it means to go green not just with their offices but with their whole organization,” says Orawski. One client recently asked for help in offsetting the carbon dioxide emissions of its energy usage to make its space “carbon neutral,” prompting Orawski to respond, “Oh boy, this is going to be fun!”
Here is something you might enjoy. A while back I wanted to develop a graphical way to understand how quickly the world’s great cities were growing. This little flash-based tool illustrates in real time - in one minute - city population growth. You will note that some of the population icons are disappearing. That represents net population loss for those places. There is a bigger version available if anyone wants it. Just let CKF know.
Reload this web page if you want to run the sequence again.
Now that Toronto is sliding precipitously towards hotter days year round, we all might want to consider ways to reduce our energy consumption. It turns out that one great way of doing that is with green roof technology. Simply put, a green roof is a living membrane that absorbs light and heat from the sun and converts that energy into living plants. This living layer of insulation helps keep buildings cool resulting in lower air-conditioning costs.
Paradoxically to a North-American reader, auto manufacturer Toyota (you know, the one that makes the hybrid Prius and is about to become the world’s biggest car manufacturer because it builds cars people want) is leading the market in green roof technology. Can you imagine Hummer-maker GM doing this?
But the folks from Toyota Roof Gardens (a subsidiary of the Prius-creating car company) have solved your green roof installation qualms with a tile-based system that’s as easy as laying down carpet. The TM9 self-watering turf tiles measure twenty inches square, and connect directly to irrigation systems, making them entirely self-watering. And at a slim 2 inches thick, the tiles lightweight and do not require any additional structural upgrading to your existing roof.
At only $43 per tile, the TM9 system provides a modular, easy-to-install, cost-effective option for green-minded homeowners. In terms of maintenance, the tiles need only be cut once a year, thanks to a special breed of Korean velvet grass. And of course, like all green roofs, you’ll rest easy knowing that your easy installation is providing a natural cooling effect, thermal insulation, and a little extra flora in your home environment.
The list of books I want to read but have not yet managed to is growing to epic proportions. Being somewhat eclectic in my reading preferences doesn’t help. In a week I’ll go from the new translation of the “Art of War,” to “How to Change the World,” to revisiting Frank Herbert’s “Dune," to a recommended novel (too much time on my hands - we don’t have kids). One book that’s been on my must read list is “Capitalism: As If The World Matters,” by Jonathon Porritt. I’ve just started it.
Many in the environmental community have taken issue with Porritt’s thesis: We can’t be true environmentalists without changing the nature of capitalism. Well, what they’re really upset with is that Porritt seems to argue that environmentalists who don’t engage in forcing that change are, in effect, enablers of an ultimately destructive system. Here are Porritt’s words on the topic from the “Open Democracy“ web site:
Hence my contention in Capitalism As If The World Matters that the environment movement is going to have to raise its game. We have got to get better at presenting the overwhelmingly positive benefits of the proposed transition in terms of new opportunities for entrepreneurs, new sources of economic prosperity and jobs, a higher quality of life for people, safer, more secure communities, and a better work-life balance.
Such assertions irritate the hell out of some environmentalists. Tony Juniper of Friends of the Earth has taken me to task in the following terms:
“Jonathon Porritt is big on analysis but short on solutions when it comes to setting out how campaigners can render our capitalist system sustainable. This is the biggest job in history. Suggesting that environmental groups have somehow failed because they have not risen to this challenge is simply ridiculous.
“Green groups have been pressing the ideology of sustainability for years – including in relation to how ‘growth’ and capitalist assumptions must change."
Unfortunately, that’s just not the case, not even in Europe, let alone in the United States. We‘re still the people who like to say “no”, to talk more in terms of nightmares rather than visions, and we still rely on a very narrow socio-economic and ethnic base in “holding our ground”. Our ideological discourse is incredibly naive at best, non-existent at worst. Which may explain why we’re still losing the world, even though to a large extent we’ve won the intellectual argument.
It will be interesting to pour through the book with this internal debate as a context. An even better context is the Harper government’s recent decision to change its Environment Minister when it realized that pushing environmental issues to the bottom rung of the policy ladder turned out to be a big mistake. Mr. Harper was on Canada’s national phone-in show, “Cross Country Checkup,” yesterday and said that the future will see him to have been a great environmental leader. I somehow doubt it but I’m sure Mr. Harper wasn’t saying it for my ears. I wonder what Porritt thinks of the Canadian system.
Aside from going outside the party and making Elizabeth May a Green Party Senator, then enticing her to be Environment Minister with carte blanche for pulling Canada’s green socks up, the PM made the best choice available today for Canada’s new Environment Minister.
I don’t know newly minted Environment Minister John Baird that well to say if he has a burning desire to save Canada’s environment.
But if the green will is there, I like the prospects of him finding a way to lift Canada out of our increasingly fossilized abyss for three reasons:
*He is a pit bull. Digging Canada out of the doldrums is no task for a poodle, especially considering some of the entrenched interests and status quo proponents that will have to be scared off.
*As the former Energy Minister of Ontario, he knows Energy, the biggest source of greenhouse gases by a large margin and will have a better chance at effectively navigating this political minefield.
*He is a great communicator. Leading Canada into battle into the war on climate change is going to take someone who can rile up the troops and public opinion to mobilise individual and industry action.
Now the big question is do the conservatives really believe it’s go green or go home (as in lose the next election)? If they do, then this could be an interesting next few months.
We have been waiting expectantly all morning to see how Harper would restructure his cabinet. Of course, what we really wanted to see was how delicately or indelicately Sheila Rhona Ambrose would be cut from the Environment portfolio. The minister who famously said:
“We could shut all the lights off in Canada tomorrow, but that still wouldn’t be enough,” she said. “To reach our Kyoto target, we’d have to shut off all the lights and shut down the entire agriculture industry.”
was out of her league and as the environment became more critical to politics in this country, Stephen Harper knew it.
Putting John Baird in the role of Environment Minister indicates just how important the Conservatives think the position is. But are they too late? The Liberals have stolen the issue by selecting former Environment Minister, Stephane Dion, as the leader of the Liberal Party. By putting Ambrose in the role to begin with, Harper illustrated just how little interest he had in an issue that most Canadians rate next to health care in importance. We know as an Albertan he is unlikely to put any restrictions on that province’s oil and gas industry. Now, his mostly symbolic action may be too little, too late.
The best-selling book "The Omivor's DIlemma," by Michael Pollan took a critical view of the mass-market organic food industry. That view included the market leading Whole Foods chain. Whole foods founder and CEO John Mackey objected to the way his company was portrayed and decided to write Pollan an open letter. Pollan, in turn, responded. Green Money Journal printed the entire correspondence and we are copying it here because it is an important public health issue.
Dear Michael,
I am deeply appreciative of your efforts to encourage your readers to take a closer look atwhere their food comes from. I especially like the way you lead your readers to understand thattheir everyday choices do make a difference both in the food supply chain and the environmentalsustainability of the planet. As you point out in the "Big Organic" (Supermarket Pastoral) chapterof your book, credible information about the sources of our food in conventional foods stores islimited to non-existent.
As the co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods Market, I lead aninnovative business that has offered customers numerous choices in natural and organic foods formore than 27 years. Yes, the business has grown in size - from one store to our current 184 -keeping pace with the increasing popularity of these products in the developed world. And, as aFortune 500 company, we might be considered a big company by many people. However, Whole FoodsMarket has done more to advance the natural and organic foods movement in general and local organicgrowers and artisanal food producers specifically than any other business currently operating inNorth America. These points are not mentioned in your otherwise engaging examination of modern foodsystems. Quite the opposite, in fact, as you go out of your way to criticize Whole Foods Market andassociate us (unfairly and inaccurately) with what you call "Industrialized Organic" and "BigOrganic."
Whole Foods Market's co-presidents, Walter Robb and A. C. Gallo, and I try to beavailable to the media, as you might have realized during your research on other pieces that havebeen written on our company in the last few years. I am not aware of any attempt on your part tocontact company leadership in any way. I greatly enjoyed reading your book Botany of Desire and Icertainly would have enjoyed speaking with you in person while you were conducting your research. Imay have been able to clear up some misconceptions before they appeared in print.
Becauseof our success and growth, Whole Foods Market attracts a lot of praise, comparison and, sometimes,hostility - along with the occasional puzzling ethical or moral judgment. As a retail business thatoperates at a level of transparency far exceeding that of almost any other business of its size, Ifind this curious but figure that these judgments are a by-product of our success. Your bookfocuses on several points, either by implication or actual statement that I find troublesome interms of their accuracy. I want to provide you with additional background on these points andprovide you with the names of Whole Foods Market spokespersons who can assist with any researchmaterials or clarification that you may need in the future.
I regret that you did notengage in any serious research about how Whole Foods Market actually does business or you wouldhave discovered that we support local and small farm food production all over the United States aswell as in other parts of the world. Whole Foods Market, despite its size, does not operate as atypical monolithic corporation such as Wal-Mart (with which you associate Whole Foods Marketseveral times in your book). Our company continues to operate on a decentralized model wherein eachof our 11 regions, as well as each store,
(...read more...)
We quipped yesterday that there is no need to go south - southern temperatures have come to us. The image of this glider trying to launch himself from the slopes of Riverdale tells the story of yesterday’s weather. December was the warmest on record. Yesterday’s highs were a record for January 1. What’s next? Will Toronto boast Vancouver-like weather with flowers in February?
Anyone who did not believe in global warming has to be convinced now. Many, sadly, will say it a good thing. The Economist recently ran a story on how the Russian economy will benefit from access to Arctic shipping routes that are now navigable for the first time in history. Already, U.S. spokespeople are saying they will use Canadian Arctic waters to ship goods across the top of the continent.
For someone who remembers a childhood with backyard skating rinks from December to March, the change in Toronto’s climate is disturbing. Unfortunately, we cannot turn the clock back but we can prevent further environmental damage. Yesterday’s weather is, if nothing else, a call to action.
NASA’s www.visibleearth.nasa.gov web site has some good supplemental information and satellite images on the Ayles Ice Shelf. Just in case you have been too busy with family this holiday season, it was reported yesterday that a large section of this shelf broke off 16 months ago. NASA writes:
The Arctic’s largest ice shelf is breaking up. The Ward Hunt Ice Shelf is a remnant of the compacted snow and ancient sea ice that extended along the northern shores of Ellesmere Island in Northern Canada until the early twentieth century. Rising temperatures have reduced the original shelf into a number of smaller shelves, the largest of which was the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf on the northwest fringe of the island.
The fracturing of Canada’s ice shelves is blamed on global warming. A quick review of the world’s press illustrates that an event that takes place in Canada’s north is of interest to other nations too. Even Australia picked up the story:
TORONTO: A giant ice shelf the size of 11,000 football fields has snapped free from Canada’s Arctic ice shelf.
The mass of ice broke clear 16 months ago from the coast of Ellesmere Island, 800km south of the North Pole, but no one was present to see it in Canada’s remote north.
Events like this are so far removed from our every day lives that they are quickly forgotten in spite of the “canary in a coal mine” message they send. Our job is to make the systemic changes required to reduce global warming and stop these dramatic changes to the environment.
The World Economic Forum launches today in Davos, Switzerland and Corporate Knights editor Toby Heaps is there along with our publisher, Karen Kun. Follow Corporate Knights Forum as Toby posts his journal on this year’s proceedings. Global warming is a major topic at this year’s conference:
We have been waiting expectantly all morning to see how Harper would restructure his cabinet. Of course, what we really wanted to see was how delicately or indelicately 
