Getting to Drawdown

Drawdown

Book CoverDrawdown, [1] a new book edited by Paul Hawken, presents about 80 proven action areas for reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions. The book and its action areas take a notably comprehensive view by including greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide, and by not limiting carbon dioxide emissions to those related to energy production. Each of the action areas is well researched, with quantitative projections for future greenhouse gas emissions reductions. About 20 “coming attractions” – emerging technologies – are also presented, but, appropriately, are not considered in a quantitative sense.

Since Climate Change is a set of anticipated negative effects from Global Warming, which is attributed to increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere, it follows that reducing future emissions of greenhouse gases can delay those negative effects. Further, there are natural processes that remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere (notably, but not exclusively, photosynthesis). If annual global emissions of greenhouse gases can be reduced sufficiently, then atmospheric concentrations of those gases can reach a point where natural removal processes, perhaps augmented with new technologies, can begin to be reduced — drawn down — year over year.

The book does not present a plan for systematically implementing the several action areas on a global scale, never mind the book’s subtitle. Realistically, creating such a plan, with an objective of achieving drawdown, is certainly not a simple matter. Effectively executing that plan is likely much tougher.

Challenges

There are a number of serious and fundamental challenges that creating and effectively executing a globally sufficient plan that should be expected. Here are two of them:

>> U.S. and the World: Over the coming decades, the U.S., along with other economically developed nations, faces a vastly different set of demographics than do less developed nations. Developed nations can expect slow population growth rates, aging populations and rather static economies. Less developed nations face more rapid population growth, along with rapidly rising expectations for economic growth. [2] This chart projects greenhouse gas emissions over the next several decades: [3]

IEO 2016 - Carbon Dioxide

As you can see, greenhouse gas emissions are projected to roughly correlate with population growth and economic growth, such that the U.S. cannot directly control reduction in global emissions sufficiently to achieve drawdown. Even if the U.S. were able to eliminate all of its emissions, global emissions would continue to rise. Direct control over sufficient emissions reductions to achieve drawdown lies among the many developing nations, each with its own interests and priorities. There, the U.S. can only indirectly influence emissions to some degree or another.

This does not mean that American emissions don’t matter or should not be reduced. It does mean that the U.S. alone cannot achieve global drawdown.

>> Urgent vs Important: Dr. Covey [4] taught many of us that the urgent almost always gets priority over the important. At the most zoomed out level, Climate Change competes for active attention with other potential global threats, such as global war, financial system collapse, terrorism or epidemic. Zooming in, Climate Change competes with the panoply of routine business issues – supply chains, customers, production, technology, industry issues, ad nausium — for the active awareness of business people.

Drawdown provides a ready collection of proven techniques and a rational objective: achieving drawdown. An executable plan for achieving that objective within a few decades is still needed.

Thoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington (Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.


[1] Paul Hawken, editor, Drawdown The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed to Reverse Global Warming, Penguin Books (2017)

[2] For more on this, see: Carbon, America and the World, this blog, http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2017/04/01/carbon-america-and-the-world/

[3] This chart is from the 2016 International Energy Outlook, published by the U.S. Energy Information Agency. Available on-line at www.eia.gov . The  chart is restricted to carbon dioxide emissions, rather than the more comprehensive view of greenhouse gases that Downturn takes. However, it does make the point that the U.S., of itself, cannot control reaching a condition of global drawdown.

[4] Covey, Stephen, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Revised Edition, Free Press (2004)

Recycling the Circular Economy

Recycling is at the heart of the Circular Economy. Embracing the Circular Economy, a post from 21 March 2016 discuses the concept of a Circular Economy, especially as it applies to smaller manufacturers. Embracing the Circular Economy is worth recycling — so here it is:


Embracing the Circular Economy

The Circular Economy

In an industrial sense, the term circular economy refers to a systemic view of resources utilization. It replaces the linear one pass take (from the natural world) … make (something incompatible with the natural world) … and dispose of (that is, burden the natural world with) production wastes along with the product itself at the end of its useful life. Instead, the circular economy envisions closed loop production which minimizes impacts on the natural world. Circular economy begins with products designed with multiple cycles of reuse and recycling in mind. Corresponding industrial processes are designed to minimize interactions which degrade the natural world, including interactions which occur anywhere along the product’s value chain.

Cutting to the Chase

It is readily apparent that a circular economy mindset might lead to lower costs, as well as a better world. The question becomes how to improve on what you are already doing to improve resource utilization. Here are some comments and examples to stimulate your thinking:

BMW i3 Press Kit Photo

BMW i3 Electric Vehicle

>> BMW i3 – The BMW i3 all-electric city car is an example of a circular economy product. Attention to sustainability is obvious in just about everything about the design and construction of the BMW i3. Recycled materials are used extensively.  Plans are in place for disposal of each component of the i3 at the end of its useful product life. For more on the i3, see BMW – A Case Study in Sustainability. [1]

>> Waste Management Corporation – Waste Management makes more than half of its money on recycling and upcycling refuse that people like you and me pay them to take from us. Sustainability – especially the circular economy aspect – Is integral to Waste Management’s business model. For more on how this works, see Waste Management Corp – A Case Study in Sustainability [2] and Waste Management’s 2015 Sustainability Report Update (which is entitled “The Circular Economy Revs Up”!) [3]

>> USBCSD – The United States Business Council on Sustainable Development is a not for profit business association that, among other projects, seeks to match bi-product streams with firms – often in other industries — that can use those bi-products as raw materials. In other words, one firm’s waste becomes another firm’s feedstock, to the benefit of both. See USBCSD’s website [4] for more on their work.

Scrap Tires 350pxh>> Tires – Where Waste Management Corporation seeks to find uses with the broad range of wastes it collects from residences, commercial facilities and industry, the tire industry focuses on new uses for its hard to dispose of product. Tire Recycling: An Industry Success Story was one of the first posts to this blog, almost five years ago. This lightly edited version still provides a useful example today: 


Tire Recycling: An Industry Success Story

(From 29 June 2011) 

American motorists discard a lot of tires; roughly one tire per capita or around 310 million used tires annually. On the average, tire carcasses weigh about 37 pounds, so that’s something like 11 billion pounds of waste rubber and metal every year. In the past, most of these used tires went to dumps, where they were ugly, mosquito – breeding fire hazards. Today, the recycle rate is sufficient to handle this year’s carcasses, while also significantly drawing down inventories at tire dumps nationwide.

Tire dealers add a state–mandated “tipping fee”, usually around $4.00, to each new tire sold. The “tipping fee” is passed on to the tire reclaim firm when the tire reclaimer collects carcasses from the tire dealer. The tire reclaimer converts the scrap tires into some useful form, usually by shredding the scrap tires and separating the rubber from the steel tire cords. The rubber scrap may be processed further, depending on the intended application. 

More than half of the recovered scrap rubber is used as tire–derived fuel, burned as an alternate to coal, primarily to fuel cement kilns. Ground rubber has a multitude of uses, ranging from landscaping mulch, to athletic fields, to molded rubber products, and on to de-vulcanized rubber, which can be used to produce new tires. Those who are interested can download a free report chock full of information on scrap tire products and markets at www.rma.org/scrap-tires. 


One take-away for all manufacturers is that the conversion of billions of pounds of scrap from dangerous eye-sore to useful products came to be through the efforts of a trade association. Trade associations offer a particularly useful vehicle for addressing many of the industry-wide problems and opportunities that Sustainability presents. 

>> Learning from Nature – Proponents of the Circular Economy point out that there are no wastes in biological processes. Everything eventually becomes food for something else. Actually, it is better than that. Biological processes operate at or near ambient pressures and temperatures, as opposed to the energy intensive demands of many industrial processes. I was surprised to learn that the Department of Chemical Engineering where I studied is now the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering – a strong indication of the growing importance of bio – based products and processes.

>> Books – Consider the entire value chain for books and other printed matter. Start with cutting forests, then the environmental concerns with paper making, ink chemistry, collecting end of useful life products, transportation costs across the value chain, and recycling or disposal costs. Compare all of that that with a Kindle. Replacing a tangible product – or a component of a tangible product, such as the operating instructions – with a virtual (digital) product changes everything!

For Smaller Manufacturers

The ideas behind the Circular Economy are quite powerful and potentially disruptive. Every manufacturer needs to consider how to modify its business model to embrace those ideas. As you can see, there are a lot of ways to approach this – new product development / new manufacturing processes / teaming with somebody like Waste Management or USBCSD / through a trade association / even virtualization – are just for starters, there are many more possibilities.

Chuck - FranceThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.


[1] http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2014/10/04/bmw-a-case-study-in-sustainability/

[2] http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2015/01/30/waste-management-corp-a-case-study-in-sustainability/

[3] Download for free at http://wm.com/sustainability

[4] www.usbcsd.org

 

What the Frack?

On January 17th of this year, the Annual Energy Outlook for 2017 (AEO 2017) was published by the Energy Information Agency, part of the U.S. Government.[1] The AEO examines U.S. domestic energy production and consumption, with extrapolations[2] into the future. Information from the AEO 2017 provides information and insights relevant to business management. This post focuses on petroleum and natural gas production through hydraulic fracture and directional drilling techniques (“fracking”).

America and Petroleum

The graphic labeled “Energy Consumption” is from the AEO 2017. The brown line indicates that petroleum and related liquids fuels about 35% of America’s energy current energy consumption.[3] Further, it indicates little change in annual petroleum consumption over the next 24 years, given the assumptions used to extrapolate the AEO’s “reference case”.

Over the past several decades, the U.S. has consistently consumed considerably more petroleum than it has produced. The difference has been imported, much of it from the Middle East. Since imports must be paid for, petroleum imports have resulted in a substantial drag on the U.S. economy. Further, securing continuing petroleum supplies from overseas has been a major determinant of U.S. foreign policy.

The graphic labeled “Net Energy Trade” illustrates that, in the years around 2006 – 2008, the U.S. imported amounts of petroleum equivalent to over 25% of its entire annual energy consumption, net of any petroleum exports!

Then something dramatic happened. U.S. domestic production increased rapidly from about 2010, resulting in a major decline in global petroleum prices. Accordingly, retail gasoline prices declined by about half during the last six months of 2014, resulting in boost to the U.S. economy that, in my opinion, triggered in the end of the Great Recession. Think of it this way: when a boatload of crude oil arrived in 2013 at $100+ per barrel, the U.S. shipped a boatload of greenbacks overseas in payment. By 2015, the price of crude was less than $50 per barrel and the number of boatloads imported dropped sharply. So, the U.S. shipped many fewer greenbacks overseas in payment. The rest stayed at home, within the U.S. economy. Since we are talking about millions of barrels every day, the difference really matters.

The Fracking Revolution

Fracking – petroleum and natural gas production by directional drilling plus hydraulic fracturing – is a truly remarkable technological innovation. Look again at the graph labeled “Energy Consumption”. Notice the rapid increase in natural gas consumption from 2010. That too is due to fracking. As a fuel, natural gas is complementary to petroleum. Petroleum fuels primarily transportation. Natural gas fuels mostly stationary consumption, including industrial uses, commercial and residential heating, and especially electric power generation.  

Natural gas is difficult and expensive to transport, other than by pipeline. Fortunately, the U.S. already had a domestic pipeline network in place as the huge increase in natural gas production due to fracking became available. Prior to the advent of “fracking”, global natural gas prices generally followed petroleum (crude oil) prices. The increase in natural gas supply in the U.S. resulted in natural gas prices that are not pegged to petroleum, and that are considerably lower than natural gas prices elsewhere.

Implications, Domestic and International

>> Energy Independence: Due to increased U.S. domestic production of petroleum and natural gas, the AEO 2017 projects that U.S energy exports will exceed imports by 2026, using “reference case” assumptions. That means that, if necessary, U.S. energy production would be sufficient to satisfy America’s energy requirements, without relying on OPEC or anybody else.

>> Industrial Economics: U.S. domestic prices for natural gas are substantially lower than elsewhere in the world. This provides U.S. industry with two competitive advantages in global trade. First, energy costs are low. Second, many important petrochemicals can be produced from natural gas, resulting in lower raw materials cost for many products.

>> Petroleum and Natural Gas Reserves: Fracking is used in geological formations that are different from those where conventional petroleum and natural gas production methods are used. That means energy production becomes possible in geographic areas where it is otherwise infeasible. It also means that the world’s potential reserves of petroleum and natural gas have increased substantially.

>> International Development: Fracking technology can and will be applied in other countries. Correspondingly, many nations that lack conventional petroleum or natural gas production may be able to become producers, thus reducing dependence on foreign sources and gaining a degree of freedom from global energy prices.

>> Cleaner Fuels: Petroleum produced by fracking is generally light and sweet. That means it is easy to refine, with few byproducts such as sulfur or heavy metals. Refining light, sweet crudes is relatively energy efficient. Accordingly, less carbon dioxide is produced when light, sweet crude is produced and consumed. Natural gas is even cleaner.


There is a lot more information worth discussing in the AEO 2017. Look for more posts on other AEO 2017 in the future.

Chuck - Blue SweaterThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington (Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.


[1] The AEO 2017 is available for free download on the Energy Information Agency’s website, www.eia.gov

[2] I use “extrapolations” rather than “forecasts” to emphasize that the AEO is projecting present and recent past information into the future based on certain assumptions. The “reference case” refers to a “business as usual” set of assumptions that do not anticipate government policy changes or technological innovations, other than those already in place.

[3] Note: U.S. annual primary energy consumption is about 100 quadrillion BTUs.

 

The Globalization Gap

The Fly-over Zone

“The fly-over zone” is David Stockman’s term for the middle portion of the United States; the vast expanse roughly bounded by the Appalachian and the Sierra Nevada mountains. Stockman holds that people in the fly-over zone think differently from those on the coasts.[1] The election results from last November tend to agree.

In my view, Globalization, with its economic and social repercussions, provide insight as to why the fly-over folks think so differently from those on the coasts. In essence, Globalization has benefited Americans whose income relies on professional services and intangibles over the last several decades. Those who depend on tangibles, again speaking generally, have done considerably less than well.

 International trade, especially in consumer goods, and large-scale migration from less economically developed nations to more developed countries are two primary factors driving polarization of opinion about Globalization here in America, as well as in the European Union.

Free Trade

Global free trade is fundamental to increased and increasing global standards of living. Since the end of World War II, international economic history records a succession of moves to facilitate multinational trade by removing tariffs and other barriers to trade. One result is truly multinational companies, like GE or Nestle. Another is globalized value chains, even for small companies. Companies and consumers everywhere benefit from the lowest prices available anywhere in the world.

But it isn’t all good. Employees in some nations suffer as lower cost competitors abroad take business and jobs. Some nations import much more than they export, resulting in escalating debt. Some nations use access to resources as an economic means to political ends, like the recent Russian cuts in natural gas supplies to Europe or the OPEC oil embargo in the 1970s.

So, the benefits of free trade are widely spread, but difficult to recognize or quantify. The negatives, on the other hand, are localized and specific – those who have lost their livelihoods to free trade are not happy. And that unhappiness has resulted in political resistance to new trade pacts and movements in several countries to revise or rescind existing agreements.[2]

Migration

In 2013, author and investment banker Dan Alpert[3] wrote:

“The past twenty years have seen a transformation of the global economy unlike any ever witnessed. In the time it takes to raise a child and pack her off to college, the world order that existed in the early 1990s has disappeared. Some three billion people who once lived in sleepy or sclerotic statist economies are now part of the global economy. Many compete directly with workers in the United States, Europe and Japan in a world bound together by lightning – fast communications. Countries that were once poor now find themselves with huge large surpluses of wealth. And the rich countries of the world, while still rich, struggle with monumental levels of debt – both private and public – and unsettling questions about whether they can compete globally”

Alpert’s thesis is that the world suffers from gross over-supply of labor, capital and productive capacity. Capital moves readily across national borders seeking higher returns – meaning productive investment opportunities. When excess productive capacity exists, businesses don’t invest in more. Excess labor, looking for work and stimulated by numerous local wars and conflicts, continues to migrate from developing world countries toward developed countries.

The circumstances that Alpert describes do exist and significantly define world economies and the businesses that drive those economies. These conditions will continue until fundamental global imbalances change. That change may be gradual, spanning years, or quite rapidly, like the economic equivalent of an earthquake.

Chguck - Juneau AKThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington (Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.

Container ship graphic licensed via www.dreamstime.com


[1] David Stockman was former President Reagan’s budget director. He now writes extensively, especially on political / economic affairs.

[2] For more on this, see “Trade, at what price?” in The Economist, April 2nd – 8th 2016 edition, page 27

[3] Dan Alpert’s The Age of Oversupply, Penguin Group (USA) LLC (2014) is offers much more on this.

 

The Triple Bottom Line in Context

The Triple Bottom Line

Sustainability guru John Elkington’s concept of a Triple Bottom Line provides the most used framework for discussing Sustainability. Elkington proposed that businesses should measure and report Return on Assets Deployed information for natural (ecological) assets deployed and for social assets deployed, as well as the usual financial assets (capital) deployed figures. The three “bottom lines” represent the business’s net effects on planet, people and profit. This is obviously a more comprehensive view. Perhaps more significant is the implication that the business should show positive results which indicate enhancement to the environment and society, beyond doing no harm.

Triple Bottom LineAndrew Savitz and Karl Weber’s book, The Triple Bottom Line, extends Elkington’s idea by representing the three “bottom lines” as intersecting circles. The areas of intersection are termed “sweet spots”, meaning synergistic opportunities. For example, when power utilization efficiency is improved, profits are improved due to lower power cost, while the environment and humanity benefit through reduced carbon dioxide emissions. So, improvements in the planet and people “bottom lines” are not necessarily at the expense of the profit “bottom line”. [1]

A Systematic Approach

Approaching the Triple Bottom Line through systematic business planning appears to me to be a clearer, more pragmatic approach. By “systematic business planning” I mean integrating all three aspects of the Triple Bottom Line: in definition of the business (mission statement, vision statement, values statement), in formulating goals and objectives, and in establishing and executing the business processes necessary to successfully pursue those goals and objectives. The sequence is clear enough:

Values to Results

In this sense, Triple Bottom Line involves an increased scope of management awareness that includes attention to the natural world and humanity, in lock step with attention to financial realities.

The rub lies in setting (and achieving) sufficiently aggressive goals and objectives that express timely progress toward achievement of the mission, vision and values that define your business. Those goals and objectives are unique to each organization, in context of the organization and the business climate that exists as they are set and pursued. Accordingly, there is no ready package of goals and objectives – you have to figure them out for yourself. However, you can look at the efforts of others to help you find your own way.

Here are a few starting places:

Fetzer Winery – Fetzer is a medium sized California winery that has Triple Bottom Line Sustainability in its DNA. Start with Fetzer’s website.[2]

Ben & Jerry’s – Yep. The Vermont – based premium ice cream company founded by two hippies. Try Ben & Jerry’s website [3], especially the tabs on values.  Also, Ben & Jerry’s – A Case Study in Sustainability [4],an earlier post to this blog, may be useful.

Hershey Company – The maker of Hershey Bars began as a fair example of an early 20th century mill town, and then morphed into an extraordinary example of what a successful business can do for its employees and their neighbors. Today, more than 70 years after the death of Hershey’s extraordinary founder, Hershey’s continues as a successful multi-billion dollar company that still focuses on its roots. Start with the Wikipedia wiki on The Hershey Company.

Interface Corporation – Interface makes carpets, primarily for commercial buildings. Interface provides an example of what can happen when a manufacturing company thoroughly embraces Sustainability, from its expressed mission and vision all the way through business results. Start with Whither Sustainability? [5], a recent post to this blog.

Waste Management – Waste Management changed its business model from a business based on collecting refuse and carrying it to landfill, to one based on profiting from the refuse it collects. Both Waste Management and Interface are examples of firms that fundamentally changed the basis of their business to embrace Sustainability. See Waste Management Corporation – A Case Study in Sustainability,[6] this blog.

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals – The UN recently established a set of 17 goals for the world to achieve by 2030. The UN’s set of goals provides insight as to just how broad Sustainability is. Aligning your Triple Bottom Line goals and objectives with the UN goals may be a good idea. Start with The Age of Sustainable Development – Part 3 [7] this blog . Alternatively, just google “UN Sustainable Development Goals”.


Again, your goals and objectives are unique to your business and the business context within which it exists. The examples cited above are extreme cases which may be useful to stimulate your thinking.

Chuck in FranceThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington (Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.

Triple Bottom Line graphic credit – creative commons via Wikipedia


[1] The preceding two paragraphs are borrowed from Double Take on the Triple Bottom Line, an earlier post to this blog. http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2012/10/04/double-take-on-the-triple-bottom-line/

[2] www.fetzer.com

[3] www.benjerry.com

[4] http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2014/11/01/ben-jerrys-a-case-study-in-sustainability/

[5] http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2016/06/20/whither-sustainability/

[6] http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2015/01/30/waste-management-corp-a-case-study-in-sustainability/

[7] http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2015/12/19/the-age-of-sustainable-development-part-3/

 

Energy Utilization Efficiency and LEDs

Energy Utilization Efficiency

AEO 2015 Figure 19The graph labeled “Figure 19” [1] projects energy use in the U.S. per person (blue line) and per dollar of GDP (green line). The right hand portion of the graph (2013 – 2040) projects that annual energy consumption per American will remain rather constant, although well below consumption in 2005. Annual energy consumption per dollar of GDP, on the other hand, is projected to continue to decline. If this projection holds, only half as many watts of energy will be required to produce a constant dollar’s worth of GDP in 2040, as compared to 2005. Said another way, American energy utilization efficiency is projected to double over the period 2005 – 2040!

This improvement is a global phenomenon. The International Energy Agency (IEA) states its importance this way: [2]

“Energy efficiency in IEA member countries improved, on the average, by 14% between 2000 and 2015. This generated energy savings of 450 million metric tons of oil in 2015, enough to power Japan for a full year. These savings also reduced total energy expenditure by 540 billion United States Dollars in 2015, mostly in buildings and industry.”

$540 billion in efficiency savings sounds pretty good to me. But that’s for the whole world. Here is a more up close and personal example of what energy utilization efficiency can mean:

Lighting Industry Disruption

I have recessed lighting in the kitchen of my home. There are three ~ 5” diameter (BR-30) recessed fixtures and ten ~ 2.5” diameter (GU-10) recessed fixtures. I replaced the three 75 watt halogen bulbs from the larger fixtures and the ten 50 watt halogen bulbs from the smaller fixtures with size – equivalent LED bulbs. The larger LED bulbs each draw 9 watts, while the smaller bulbs each draw 5 watts. Right: a total of 77 watts of power draw replaces a total of 775 watts – nearly a 10 to 1 improvement.

LED Lighting DisplayActually, there is a lot more to LEDs beyond reducing your electric bill, welcome as that is. The LED value proposition offers at least these features:

  • Bulb prices are now competitive with older technology. [3]
  • Bulb service life expectancy is several times longer than older technology.
  • Significantly lower power requirements.
  • Much less heat generation.
  • Bulbs are readily available in many form factors.
  • Available in several color spectra.
  • Available with an increasing number of intelligent control alternatives – bulbs and fixtures.

The case for LEDs is so strong that Greentech Media, [4] referencing a report from Goldman Sachs, says:

“The financial institution calls LEDs one of the fastest technology shifts in human history. While wind and solar are challenging the traditional electric generation sector, they have not upended it yet the way LEDs have overtaken the lighting industry. By 2020, LEDs will make up 69% of (lighting) sales and close to 100% by 2025, up from nearly nothing in 2010.”

Best of all, LEDs are an emerging technology, which will continue to evolve. Expect continuing improvements in energy utilization efficiency (it can, and will, get considerably better than the 10 to 1 improvement in my kitchen lighting). Even more importantly, expect completely new ideas as LEDs evolve from replacements in existing sizes and forms to become the creative media of the lighting industry.

Thoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington (Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.


[1] “Figure 19” is from the 2015 Annual Energy Outlook, published by the Energy Information Agency, a service of the U.S. Government.  www.eia.gov

[2] Energy Efficiency Market Report 2016, International Energy Agency, page13. https://www.iea.org/eemr16/files/medium-term-energy-efficiency-2016_WEB.PDF

[3] As the snapshot of an LED retail display at my local Home Depot indicates, common residential replacement bulbs are readily available for a few dollars.

[4] See www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/led-not-solar-have-transformed-their-industry , which refers to a Goldman Sachs report at www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/new-energy-landscape/future-of-clean-energy/index.html

On Globalization Immigration and Pragmatism

Globalization and its effects are simply facts of 21st century life. The pragmatist looks first at those effects that most urgently affect the pragmatist’s life and business, then seeks a pragmatic solution – a solution that can actually work for all involved.

Viewed from here in the southwestern United States, illegal immigration is one such issue needing resolution. The following, reprised from two earlier post to this blog, proposes an approach that offers a real chance for a lasting solution. The pragmatist also knows that band-aids and stop-gap measures may be necessary as a lasting solution is implemented. But the pragmatist does not confuse the temporary with the lasting.    — C.H.


A Tale of Two Borders

Benito Juarez, a five term president of Mexico in the mid-19th century, famously lamented “Poor Mexico, so far from God, so close to the United States”. Today, many in the U.S., especially here in the southwest, complain about illegal immigration from Mexico.

Finger pointing didn’t work in the 19th century, and it will not work now – in either direction. Canada is just as close to the United States as Mexico is. There are no significant immigration issues between the U.S. and Canada. The difference is the approximate economic parity between the U.S. and Canada. The solution to the illegal immigration issue lies in addressing the cause of that issue — the economic disparity between the U.S. and our neighbor to the south.

Those demographics and trends suggest that reducing the economic gap between Mexico and the U.S. / Canada is possible over the coming two or three decades. With the active support of its neighbors to the north, Mexico could build a large, globally competitive economy that exports worldwide and builds big new markets within Mexico. With a cooperative arrangement that catches the demographic tide, Mexico’s economic growth need not be at its northern neighbors’ expense.

The prize is a U.S. – Mexican border that works like the U.S. – Canadian border.

Lose the Sombrero

serape and cactusLose the sombrero, the serape and the siesta. Those old stereotypes hardly fit the modern country that Mexico is rapidly becoming. Two recent news items put this into focus:

(1) The World Business Council for Sustainable Development’s Vision 2050 report [i] projects that, in 2050 — 37 years from now — Mexico will have the fifth largest economy in the world, as measured by GDP. That’s right, #5 — behind China, the U.S., India and Brazil; but ahead of Germany, Japan and everybody else. That may shock the stereotype. However, Mexico is already #12 and growing at about 4% annually, while most of the larger economies are currently growing at considerably slower rates.[ii]

(2) Fifty years ago, the fertility rate — the number of children per woman — here in the U.S. was about 3.2, while the rate in Mexico was a whopping 6.8. That’s right, on the average, each Mexican woman had about 6.8 children. Today, the rate in the U.S. is about 2.0, while the rate for Mexican women is about 2.2. And, the projection for 2020 for the U.S. is closer to 2.1, while the Mexican rate is projected to drop below 2.0. [iii] As Mexico’s population growth rate drops, conditions exist for economic growth per person to increase sharply.

The Giant Sucking Sound

Ross Perot received 18.9% of the vote as an Independent candidate in the 1992 U.S. presidential election, a huge percentage for an Independent candidate. Perot was strongly opposed to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). He famously warned of a “giant sucking sound” as manufacturing jobs in the U.S. went south, into Mexico. [iv] Perot lost the election and the manufacturing jobs went. But they went to China, not to Mexico. Why? Labor costs in Mexico were lower than those in the U.S., but labor costs in China were much lower yet:

capture-mexico-avg-mfg-costs

But that Was Then

As you can see, the difference between labor rates is shrinking because rates in China are increasing much faster than those in Mexico. Add to that the costs of transporting goods from China to the U.S., the logistic costs associated with long lead times from China, currency fluctuations, and the hassles involved with doing business in China. Mexico is becoming more competitive every day.

But wait… there’s more: [v]

>> Mexico graduates more engineers every year than Germany.

>> Mexico has free trade deals with 44 countries, more than any other nation.

>> Minimum wage in Shanghai and Qingdao is now higher than in Mexico City and Monterrey.

>> Mexico produces substantially more petroleum than it consumes, and Mexico’s petroleum reserves are sufficient to allow Mexico to remain energy independent for a long time. 

As a consequence of all this, five years from now, Mexico is projected to have passed China as a supplier of manufactured goods to the U.S.:

Mexico exports to the US

 

Certainly, Mexico has problems, big internal problems, that must be resolved if Mexico is to take advantage of these opportunities for economic development. The Economist referred to Mexico as “Latin American’s perennial underachiever” — if the political will to manage those problems comes to pass, as appears increasingly possible, Mexico may well lose the “perennial underachiever” tag, along with the sombrero.

What This Means for Smaller Manufacturers

Mexico is a big country, 11th largest in the world by population, with an average age 27.4 years (as compared to 37.1 years in the U.S. and 41.2 years in Canada). [vi] And, Mexico is right next door to the U.S. American manufacturers should remain aware of Mexico and its potential across their entire Value Chain:

>> As a Competitor: As discussed above, Mexico enjoys several competitive advantages over many other nations. Expect Mexican manufacturers to become increasingly strong competitors.

>> As a Market: Economic development requires capital goods and infrastructure – related products and services. As Mexico’s per capita GDP grows, demand for consumer products will also grow. U.S. manufacturers are just as close to Mexican markets as Mexican suppliers are to U.S. markets.

>> As a Supplier: The competitive advantages that Mexico enjoys as a competitor also apply to Mexico as a supplier, especially in comparison to Asian suppliers.

Chuck - SedonaThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington (Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome

Photo credit: Man with Sombrero and Serape licensed through www.dreamstime.com.


[i] Here, the Vision 2050 report cites data from Goldman Sachs. Learn about Vision 2050 at the WBCSD website, www.wbcsd.org. The entire Vision 2050 document and/or a summary are available for free download in about 10 languages. There are also PowerPoint presentations and visual aids available.

[ii] Statistics from the World Fact Book, www.cia.gov

[iii] These figures, and many others in this post, are from The Economist, 24 November 2012 issue, Special Report on Mexico. Reprints of the Special Report are available at www.economist.com. In instances where figures are not footnoted in this post, refer to the Special Report.

[iv] Information on Ross Perot are from Wikipedia, www.wikipedia.com

[v] Information from The Economist, ibid

[vi] Statistics from the World Fact Book, www.cia.gov

 

 

On Trucks, Fuels and Cost

Transport and Your Value Chain

Value Chain Diagram

A manufacturer’s value chain usually begins in the natural world, where ultimate raw materials like iron ore, pulp wood or petroleum originate. The value chain then proceeds through some number of processing steps (often with branching steps and recycling loops) all the way through the final disposition of the finished product at the end of its useful life. Between each processing step, there is a transfer — usually a physical transport – of the work in process or finished product.

Heavy TruckThis post examines transfers between facilities, especially transfers using highway trucking. It is useful — and sobering – to construct a rough diagram of your Value Chain, starting with the origin of your ultimate raw materials and passing through the many steps through ultimate disposition. The distances involved can be mind boggling, and even a rough guess at the rolled costs of all of the transports involved even more so. Those costs are directly or indirectly reflected in your costs, and the ultimate customer’s cost. Clearly, the costs of trucking matter.

Transport Costs – Fuel Consumption and CO2 Emissions

Transportation represents about 27% of America’s primary energy consumption. The overwhelming majority of that energy comes from petroleum. Access to petroleum (crude oil) has been a major constraint to the American economy and a key determinant of American foreign policy for over four decades. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to the atmosphere from the combustion of fuels derived from petroleum are believed to be a primary driver of climate change.

CO2 Emissions - Transportation

The chart labeled “Carbon Dioxide: Transportation” projects CO2 emissions from transportation sources through 2040. To good approximation, CO2 emissions can be taken to be proportional to petroleum–based fuels consumed.

The blue line indicates that light-duty vehicles (automobiles and small trucks) are the largest source of emissions (hence petroleum consumed). As you can see, the blue line crests around 2018, then declines rather smoothly. This projected decline is primarily attributed to improvements in vehicle fuel utilization efficiency.

The green line represents emissions (hence fuel consumption) by freight trucks – the vehicles primarily used in schlepping your raw materials and finished goods across your Value Chain. Unlike the blue line, the green line projects rather uniform annual increases into the future. This increase is largely attributed to increasing freight volumes.

Accordingly, for 2016, emissions from light vehicles are about 2½ times those from freight trucks. By 2040, that ratio drops to 1½ times. So, the relative importance of emissions (and petroleum consumption) by freight trucks increases rapidly.

Then What?

The projections behind the chart just discussed represent the U.S. Energy Information Agency’s “Reference Case”. The “Reference Case” is based on demographic, economic and technical projections. These projections assume timely compliance with applicable laws and regulations, such as the CAFE fuel consumption requirements for light vehicles. On the other hand, the projections do not include compliance with laws and regulations not yet finalized by the time the projections were made. Nor do the projections anticipate future technical developments, apart from those incorporated into existing laws or regulations.

So, there is a lot of good news here for manufacturers:

>> The U.S. government is projecting sustained increases in freight shipment volumes in the years to 2040, entailing increasing manufacturing activity.

>> The Government has recently finalized a second phase of its CAFE regulations on fuel consumption efficiency that will reduce fuel consumption in freight trucks by about 45% by 2027, compared to 2010 figures.

>> Possible future technical innovations, such as the use of natural gas as truck fuel, hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles or electric (or hybrid) vehicles may prove to be practical.

All in all, manufacturers may look forward to increasing freight volumes and falling per ton-mile fuel costs (with corresponding CO2 emissions reductions) in the coming years.


Chuck & Joan in ParisThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.

Truck image licensed through www.dreamstime.com

The Triple Bottom Line – Up Close and Personal

3P GraphicThe Triple Bottom Line model for Sustainability emphasizes the interdependence of the natural world, productive industry (which includes manufacturing, mining and agriculture) and human society. “Triple Bottom Line” sounds almost trite when read or said. However, when I look out my bedroom window, I have a vivid example of that interdependence literally right in front of me — the Verde River Green Zone.

The Edge of the Wild, a post to this blog from nearly two years ago, takes an up close and personal look at the Triple Bottom Line. – C.H.


The Edge of the Wild (from 9 December 2014)

The Verde River and Its Green Zone

My house is on a bluff, above and overlooking the upper reaches of the Verde River in the high desert of central Arizona. The Verde isn’t very big. However, its source is on the Mogollon Rim (a long stretch of stark cliffs marking the edge of the Colorado Plateau), fed from the 12,600’+ heights of the San Francisco Peaks. So, unlike many rivers and streams in Arizona, it rather reliably has water in it. (About 90% of all streams in Arizona are “ephemeral”, meaning they are dry except after heavy rains – which are rare.) Not surprisingly, the Verde is Arizona’s only federally designated Wild and Scenic River.

Sycamore Canyon RailwayThe Verde supports a narrow riparian green zone, typically spanning a hundred yards or so. The green zone, with its trees and foliage, stands in sharp contrast to the rocks and scrub of the adjacent desert. Riparian zones are quite rare in Arizona, constituting only about 0.4% of the land. Development within the riparian zone is hindered, since almost all of the land within the zone is subject to flash floods. Also, much of the land adjoining the river is within national forests, or is otherwise public property.

In Arizona, a few, thin riparian zones support an abundance of wildlife – coyote, javelin, waterfowl, eagles, hawks, hummingbirds and much more, including a significant number of endangered species. Riparian zones, to beg the obvious, are critical to biodiversity in arid Arizona.[1]

Little Daisy

Arizona is nicknamed “The Copper State”. The Little Daisy mine, extensively developed just in time to supply copper for the First World War, had a lot to do with that. The Little Daisy is on the slope of Mingus Mountain. Copper ore was moved down the mountain to be processed and smelted near Clarkdale, on the banks of the Verde. Mine tailings went along with the ore.[2]

There are a fair number of photographs of copper mining and refining operations here, many from a century ago. Suffice it to say that early 20th century copper mining was an environmental calamity.

Tuzigoot

Tuzigoot National MonumentTuzigoot National Monument stands near the Verde, about two miles downriver from Clarkdale. Tuzigoot is an archeological site where ruins from the Sinaguan Native American culture have been unearthed and partially reconstructed. The Sinaguan culture dates from about 550 C.E. – 1425 C.E. There are several more unexcavated sites like Tuzigoot along the Verde, including one about a quarter of a mile downriver from my house.[3]

The Sinaguan sites along the Verde were likely abandoned around 1200 C.E. The reason the sites were vacated is not clear. A period of severe drought is a reasonable guess.

Getting to the Point

This blog is about Sustainability. This post offers three examples, all within a few miles of my home that help clarify what Sustainability, in the Triple Bottom Line sense, is all about.

The Verde and its riparian zone >> I like to think of Common Wealth, that is, of worth held mutually by the inhabitants of some place or nation – or by humanity in general. This is a form of mutual inheritance that the current generation holds in trust for future generations. Each generation is entitled to the fruits of the Common Wealth, in return for protecting and extending the orchard.

Mining operations >> Early 20th century mining operations placed enormous stress on the environment, including waters like the Verde. The photographs are really striking. And the Verde, then as now, is a major water source for Phoenix, over a hundred miles downstream. Containing the effects of mining and industrial operations is a primary management responsibility, ethically as well as legally.

The Sinaguan people >> Apparently, the Sinaguan people lived along the Verde for several centuries. Then they left. The reason for their departure may well have been a collapse of the natural environment they depended on due to a prolonged drought.

This is a rather vivid illustration of the dependence of peoples and cultures on the natural environment. It applies to everybody. And it applies to human – generated pressures on the environment, as well as natural cyclic phenomena. The natural environment is your business – and your business’s business.


Chuck - Red RocksThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington (Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.


[1] For more on riparian green zones, see http://arizonaexperience.org/land/riparian-areas

[2] For more on the Little daisy mine and early 20th century copper mining, see http://azstateparks.com/Parks/JERO/

[3] “Sinagua” means “without water”. For more on the Sinaguan culture, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinagua

 

A Pathway to Performance Excellence

For an organization, the term “performance excellence” entails achieving relevant results – results that align with that organization’s view of what it is, why it exists and what it intends to achieve. Given well communicated clarity as to these basics — often expressed through statements on core values, vision and mission – it becomes possible to plot a coherent pathway to achieving outstanding results. A Clear Sense of Direction, a post to this blog from a year ago, outlines that pathway.   — C.H.


A Clear Sense of Directionfrom 5 September 2015

On Values, Vision and Mission

It has been my privilege to serve as a Baldrige – based performance excellence examiner in two states, and to serve on the Board of Overseers for the Arizona state program. National Baldrige performance excellence awards, along with their state – level counterparts, are based on written applications which respond to a comprehensive set of queries on an organization’s operating processes and practices, as well as corresponding outputs (results). Examiners are trained to seek a high degree of alignment within an applicant’s responses, tracing from statements on Core Values (who you are), Vision (the future you seek to create) and Mission (how you intend to pursue your Vision), through operating processes and practices, to demonstrated results.

In practice, however, statements on organizational Values, Vision and Mission are often little more than hype or platitudes. This is unfortunate, since earnest statements of Values, Vision and Mission provide a sense of direction and a basis for strategy, and execution for the entire organization.

Core Values [1]

Businesses awakened to the importance of core values almost twenty years ago, when Jim Collins’ and Jerry Porras’ Built to Last [2] was published. Since then, Built to Last has sold over a million copies. Built to Last sought to discover the factors that distinguished companies that enjoyed long (multi-generational) histories of sustained success by comparing clear successes with less successful rivals. The research methodology is both interesting and compelling. Bottom Line: the book’s major conclusion is that an emphasis on core values, cultivated throughout the organization’s culture, is a distinguishing hallmark of the successful companies studied. Guess what? A profusion of Values Statements ensued.

Core Values and Organizational Culture

I find it important to distinguish Values from Vision and Mission. Vision and Mission are strategic concepts regarding the organization’s approach to the marketplace. Both are situational and subject to prudent amendment as circumstances evolve. Core Values are, on the other hand, constitute “… the bedrock on which all foundations are built”.  Values reflect the beliefs of the defining senior leadership, often the organization’s founders — they are not determined democratically. Values, like solid rock, change slowly over time (earthquakes excepted, geological and organizational). Values are also restrictive, in that many of them amount to thou shalt nots [3].

Core values are foundational to the organization’s culture. The culture, in turn, defines the environment for execution. Execution means effective actions in alignment with direction. Strategic concepts provide direction.

Core values are likewise reflected in how the organization is perceived by others. This applies whether or not an organization’s values are publicized — or even recognized — within the organization. The values may be strong, or they may be weak — but they are there and they do matter.

Dr. David Hawkins provides some insight to this in his distinction between power and force [4]. Hawkins holds that individuals (and, by extension, organizations) can, due to strong core values, accrete a silent power that others find compelling. He likens this power to gravity: it is intangible and perceived only by its effects. Reasonably, this power is perceived as a virtue that the Romans called gravitas. Gravitas elicits respect, manifest as harmony within an organization and as credibility without. Harmony within supports execution. Credibility without provides an intangible boost in the marketplace — the marketplace for your goods and services, the marketplace for the talent you need, and the marketplace for the materials, services and supplies you buy.

The Vision Statement [5]

 Capture - Alice Excerpt

Stephen Covey taught a generation to “start with the end in mind” [6]. Better yet, start with a clear idea expressed clearly and communicated effectively. The Business Dictionary defines Vision Statement [7]  as:

“An aspirational description of what an organization would like to achieve or accomplish in the mid-term or long-term future. It is intended to serve as a clear guide for choosing current and future courses of action”.

Change “would like to” to something stronger — perhaps “intends to”, “commits to”, or, better yet, “will”. Limit your statement to a few memorable sentences. Be explicit about your time frame for realization — something like “by 2020” or “within five years”. Then you will have an outline for a useful Vision Statement, not just fluff or hype.

One example of a useful Vision Statement is that of Interface Corporation, the carpet manufacturer:

“To be the first company that, by its deeds, shows the world what sustainability is in all of its dimensions: people, process, product, place and profit — by 2020 — and, in doing so, become restorative through the power of influence.”

Interface’s Vision Statement spells out what they intend to accomplish and when they expect to do so. It is clear how this Vision Statement can lead to rational goals and quantifiable objectives. At last report, they are on schedule to make their 2020 commitment!

Mission Statement

The Business Dictionary defines “Mission Statement” as: [8]

“A written declaration of an organization’s core purpose and focus that normally remains unchanged over time. Properly crafted mission statements (1) serve as filters to separate what is important from what is not, (2) clearly state which markets will be served and how, and (3) communicate a sense of intended direction to the entire organization.”

“A mission is different from a vision in that the former is the cause and the latter is the effect; a mission is something to be accomplished whereas a vision is something to be pursued for that accomplishment.”

Take Green Soul Botanical’s Mission Statement as an example: [9]

“Green Soul Botanicals’ mission is to provide Spas, wellness professionals and fellow travelers on the path with unique herbal products that are effective, luxurious and natural without artifice. In doing so, Green Soul Botanicals operates in an ethical and responsible manner, while providing right livelihood for those associated. [10]

 As you can see, Green Soul’s mission statement specifies three target customer groups: Spas, wellness professionals and fellow travelers on the path (individuals that value the Spa lifestyle). The Mission Statement goes on to differentiate Green Soul’s products, its mode of operations and its responsibility to those engaged in the business. Consequently, the bases for constructing an executing a Business Model are in place.

The Pathway to Performance Excellence

Given a well communicated sense of direction, an organization can follow through by building a Business Model and setting a coherent set of goals and objectives that align with that sense of direction. Deploy those objectives throughout your organization and track those objectives through to relevant and measurable results:

Capture - Values to Results

 

Chuck at ReneThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

 

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.


[1] The paragraphs on Core Values are borrowed from On Values Culture and Gravitas, this blog, 24 January 2013: http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2013/01/24/on-values-culture-and-gravitas/

[2] Jim Collins and Jerry Porras, Built to Last, HarperCollins (1994, 1997)

[3] Patrick Lencioni, Make Your Values Mean Something, Harvard Business Review (July 2002). This HBR Tool Kit article provides useful insights on core values.

[4] David R. Hawkins, M.D. Ph.D., Power vs Force, revised edition, Veritas Publishing (1995, 1998, 2004, 2012), especially Chapter 11

[5] The paragraphs on Vision are borrowed from Better Vision, this blog, 11 September 2014: http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2014/09/11/better-vision/

[6] Covey, Stephen, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Revised Edition, Free Press (2004)

[7] http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/vision-statement.html#ixzz2GT4tPgcN

[8] http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/mission-statement.html#ixzz3kRXauQKY

[9] For more on Green Soul Botanicals see The Green in Green Soul, this blog, http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2014/05/21/the-green-in-green-soul/

[10] “Right livelihood” is a Buddhist precept. “To practice right livelihood, you have to find a way to earn your living without transgressing your ideals of love and compassion. The way you support yourself can be an expression of your deepest self” — Thich Nhat Hanh, The Heart of the Buddha’s Teaching, Parallax Press (1998), p. 104, cited on-line at: http://buddhism.about.com/od/theeightfoldpath/a/rightlivelihood.htm