Shiny Green Button

Portland’s Pearl District, where I live, has a good sustainability story. The neighborhood is compact, walkable to all basic needs and convenient to public transportation. But that particular brand—the one that sold the neighborhood at the beginning—now falls second (or lower) to the brand that’s been imposed upon it.

When reporters for everything from the neighborhood newspaper to the New York Times mention the Pearl, they usually preface it with an adjective like "trendy" or "upscale" and allude to million-dollar condos, art galleries and expensive restaurants. The fact that these amenities can be found in lots of other neighborhoods too doesn’t seem to mitigate the assumption that the Pearl is for snobby rich people. It isn’t a sustainability story any more—it’s a conspicuous consumption story.

Most of the Pearl’s housing takes the form of condos and apartments, which typically means people live in less space for the money. And yes, these places are pretty well designed and well outfitted. Still, living in one, with no yard, no sprawl, means making a choice to take up less room and accept that your neighbors can see into your windows. As if they care anyway.

But this isn’t about some virtuous Pearl lifestyle. (All those SUVs in condo garages say otherwise.) It’s just a way of saying it’s hard to reclaim a brand once its image gets away from you, and that’s especially true with far too many sustainability brands. Which, in an economy like today’s, is worrisome.

For the moment, many green choices—be they condo living or organic food—are costlier choices that are perceived as choices for those who can afford them. Sign up for renewable energy and pay higher rates. Buy recycled copy paper and pay a buck more per ream. Build a LEED-certified building and pay more per square foot. Spend more for a hybrid car, and so on. That’s why so many news stories say environmental priorities are fading for many people as the economy tanks.

The solution is far from clear to me, but allowing environmental progress to come to a  halt isn’t it. At the very least, it seems important to continue to tell the economic side of every sustainability story.

I’m sure the first thing you look for while watching college football is how green your team’s football stadium is. Or maybe you look for the recycling bins, worried that students and fans won’t have a place to deposit their 12 oz. plastic cups that used to be filled with beer. Anything to find out the environmental initiatives of your university.

There’s a better solution available: simply check out the College Sustainability Report Card rankings for all the details about colleges and universities environmental cred. Schools such as Oberlin College, Harvard, Stanford, University of Colorado and a few more earned the top grade: an A-minus. Schools are graded on several different categories, including administration, endowment transparency, green buildings and food and recycling. While not every single college or university is listed here, there are plenty to choose from. And that has to be reassuring, right?

Sure, these rankings appeal to the greatest supporters of the environment, but how do they reach people who haven’t heard a lot about climate initiatives, alternative energy and more comprehensive recycling programs? And how do the universities communicate their efforts? During college football games, you’ll find plenty of information about the schools playing and the athletic conferences they represent, but where’s the beef when it comes to these environmental initiatives? Where’s the commercial showing the sustainability fund at the University of Oregon, or the ad talking about the local food and recycling initiatives at the University of Florida, or the ad covering the investments in renewable energy funds by the University of Kansas? All three big athletic universities, all three doing their part for the environment.

Maybe it’s related to the fact that two ranked categories–shareholder engagement and endowment transparency–are consistently the two lowest-ranked categories on the list. So if the public, the university shareholders, the endowment boards and others aren’t putting pressure on universities to communicate this message and improve their efforts, why should they reach out and do more? Who’s holding them accountable?

Perhaps they’d become more aware of the fact if we took some of those athletic championship banners and trophies away. Maybe then they’d take their efforts seriously.

According to a new study out today, Portland tops the list as the greenest city in the United States, successfully defending its number one ranking from last year.

SustainLane, a green-focused media company, evaluated the largest 50 cities in the U.S. on 16 economic, environmental and green/clean tech categories.

These sorts of lists always come with the tang of PR opportunism, but there is something to the point SustainLane makes about the growing risks facing the bottom-ranked cities. According to SustainLane's CEO, cities such as Mesa (50), Memphis (46) and Fresno (37) are endangering their local economies by ignoring the growing green expectations among residents and businesses. In other words, people and businesses will begin migrating from cities with poor environmental conditions to those with strong ones.

I agree, and think this shift will pick up speed as (a) green technology and industries receive more tax incentives and drive greater economic growth and (b) the liabilities of dealing with a wider range of environmental issues are more consistently accounted for in the P&L statement.

It'll also be interesting to watch how top-ranked cities continue to integrate their green credentials into their branding. You're already seeing it, but I'd expect communications from Portland, Seattle, San Francisco and others increasingly use their green brand to attract and keep the innovative companies and trained workforce to compete in the emerging low-carbon, green economy.

But the thing to watch for, I think, is how folks integrate the greeness of their city into their own personal brand. Does it make you cooler or more attractive to live in a green city? Does it give your resume more credibility (particularly if you're trying to break into a green industry)? Many people are already choosing certain products and brands to signal their commitment to green–will they begin pumping up their zip code too?

Seems like everybody is talking Green these days: from the gas pumping dude who glances at my F250 and asks if my rig runs on “bio-D,” to the check-out clerk at Freddie’s wondering if I brought cloth bags for my groceries. There’s a LEED certified apartment building going up across the street from my house and that aforementioned Fred Meyer’s is the first in the chain to go LEED as well. Green-chatter is everywhere, and at least in my community much of the conversation is interesting, enlightened and impassioned.

And then I took a tour of a few Fortune 500-type company websites last week. No worries—this was a work-related assignment—not something I do by way of home entertainment. I was trolling for information on corporate social responsibility and sustainability and boy was I dumbstruck by the fact that so many company CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) reports are SO freaking BORING. There were lengthy tales of success around the Three-Rs (reduce, reuse, recycle) facts and figures and dull diagrams discoursing about actual and important achievements, but really after the first five pages, who cares?

Who are these reports for? Must be Investors and company employees with time on their hands, because they’re clearly not meant for real people. If you’re killing time until 5 p.m. check out Kroger’s CSR story for fun. It’s got pictures.

The thing is, this stuff IS important and real people care about it. Why not make it interesting and accessible?

I ran across an article in AdAge today that focuses on the internal musings of the Fab 500 trying to sort out who’s going to run the CSR show and whether or not they will get budget and head count to do so. Gwen Migata, Director of CSR at Harrah’s Entertainment is quoted as saying that Harrah’s communication effort around sustainability achievement has been very “back-of-the-house.” “It’s time to communicate our efforts to consumers and how they will see it in hotel rooms and in companywide promotions," Migata says. "Translating an ethos and commitment into tangible numbers and brand value is hard.”

No kidding! And it sure doesn’t help to go to a company website and find the CSR messaging neatly tied up in a dreadfully dull package that makes me want to run home and wash my dog.

It started out like most days. Slug down some coffee, grab some clothes, shove them in a backpack and get myself and my bike out the door before the critical point when I need to bail out and drive. I’m motivated by the fitness I gain, gas and emissions saved, and a fresh perspective on the morning—both on my commute and in the office.

Plus, I hate driving in traffic! Consider this: when you ride a bike, there are no traffic jams. Really. Many Portland bike commuters find they actually save time riding versus driving to work. My Portland-to-Vancouver commute is fairly long, but stress-free. I love it.

On this particular day in early September, I whizzed past four riders at an intersection just as the light turned green. Eat my dust, newbies! They caught up to me at the next light, and I heard one of them say my name. Turns out I had rudely flown by four of my coworkers without even recognizing them. Three are relatively new to bike commuting as of this summer (Brett, Eric and Jamie), but riding strong. Kristi has been a hardcore commuter for years. Another rider, Leanne, is our lone Vancouver-residing bike commuter. [Yes, I do mean that as a challenge to you ‘Couvies!] Though I suspect it has something to do with a less-than-favorable traffic conditions for Vancouver riders.

During the last three years, AHA! has formed teams for two annual bike commute challenges. I was the first cyclist to commute to our company on a regular basis and have encouraged coworkers to sign up. For this September’s bike commute challenge, oranized by Portland nonprofit Bicycle Transportation Alliance, we have a larger team than ever. I think I can speak for us all when I say that it’s much more than the price of gas that motivates us. It’s the environmental benefits and strong belief that each of us has to do something now—whatever we can—to prevent global warming.

For some of us, it’s also an excuse to replace some of the carbs and calories we’ve burned, guilt-free, in both liquid and solid form. Anyone who would like to support the Bicycle Transportation Alliance’s efforts to organize this annual bike commute challenge is invited to McMenamins Market Street Pub in downtown Portland on Monday, September 22. The BTA will be the beneficiary of all food and drink sales.

Here are the results for our team, the AHA! Low-Carbon, High-Carb All-Stars as of September 18 (the contest began Sept. 1):

• More than 34 bike commute round trip
• More than 800 miles logged
• Approximately 40,000 calories burned
• Approximately 800 pounds of CO₂

Totals for all challenge participants in the Portland area are even more impressive:

• More than 600,000 miles logged by participants!
• Approximately 30 million calories burned
• Approximately 600,000 pounds of CO₂

Here’s what’s interesting to me right now: The financial services industry. Call me a nerd, if you must, but before you do think about this: right now some people in the money business have run into money trouble. Bear Stearns took a nasty fall in March, Fannie May and Freddie Mac just got a massive federal hand-out, and Washington Mutual is buckling. It’s a fast-paced, high-endurance flail to keep afloat which makes watching this piece of history unfold both terrifying and fascinating.

The wild ride is far from over. Last night, while listening to the buttery voice of Marketplace’s Kai Ryssdal I was hit with the news that another giant company had just hit the floor, dead. Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy late Sunday night. In the same sentence Kai mentioned that Bank of America just bought Merrill Lynch. And my jaw dropped. A very large bank just bought a very large investment firm. What a day in financial services.

This last part is especially interesting to me because Merrill Lynch and Bank of America both happen to be leaders in the green movement. Financial services companies are realizing that there is a need to become socially and environmentally responsible, not just because the world could use a little help right now, but also because it’s profitable. Merrill Lynch and Bank of America are definitely at the forefront of this change. So, what does it mean when two companies who are leading the movement into sustainable investments are now one company?

The opinions are split. There are many people shaking their heads right now. The $50 billion Bank of America paid for Merrill Lynch is too big, some say. They could both go down in flames and then where will we be? In a nasty place, let me tell you. Our economy does not have any room for failure right now.

But there’s another side too, the side that’s applauding Merrill Lynch for having the foresight to know when to sell and Bank of America for knowing a good opportunity when it came their way. Unlike the buy of Bears Stears by JPMorgan, which, let’s face it, was a total pity-buy, this could be very cool.

If they do well, a giant Bank of America could compound all of the investments Merrill Lynch had in sustainable industries. But then again, what if they change their priorities? What if they start to say that this is no time for building Platinum level LEED certified buildings? Or that allocating time and money for philanthropic programs is just too expensive in the current market? Well, I just hope they don’t. I hope that both of these companies have realized the logic and profit in investing money into sustainable enterprises, but it’s a question that carries a lot of weight.

For instance, did you know that Merrill Lynch signed a three-year partnership agreement with the Carbon Disclosure Project in March? It’s Merril Lynch who signed the agreement, but now that they are no longer going to be “Merril Lynch” will the CDP still have a partner and sponsor? Is Bank of America going to fill those shoes?

If Bank of America succeeds we could see a huge and powerful company that is dedicated to the greening of the financial services industry set a new standard. And the success ease the fears of so many other financial services companies who are thinking about going green. But will it happen? I have no idea, I’m just a nerd, not an expert. What do you think?

Have you ever had one of those "should I splurge for the organic variety?" debates? I had yet another the other evening, triggered by a box of Annie’s mac & cheese.

"Should I spend the additional 75 cents to get the fully organic kind? The cheaper one has organic pasta but not organic cheese-esque sauce," I asked my friend as we were perusing the packaged mac & cheese aisle of the grocery store.

"Well, I’m a minimalist, so I always buy the cheapest," he said, pointing to the Kraft version.

I don’t think my jaw had enough time to drop—it was too busy motor-mouthing its way to offending a good friend: "WHAT?! That’s illogical! Kraft isn’t minimal! What about the umpteen unnecessary chemicals and artificial flavors? The pesticides? The completely non-minimal impact on the environment? The only thing minimal about it is its affect on your pocketbook!"

What I would give to learn how to shut myself up sometimes. Not to mention that by purchasing the mac & cheese, I was already in direct violation of my #1 rule, which states that I shall never buy anything in a box that I can make myself, with far less packaging and processing and with much greater health benefit and flavor, at home.

Or that my friend, we’ll call him G, bikes to work every day and does not even own a car. So who am I to chastise him for buying a Kraft product when my 13-mile round-trip daily commute probably negates the environmental benefits of buying the organic variety—about 8 million times over?

Or that by ‘minimalist’ G means that he intentionally spends as little money as possible, which translates to rarely, if ever, purchasing anything new? (He hasn’t bought a pair of newly-manufactured clothes since the 90s, he pointed out.)

I’m not sure what my point is, other than that everyone’s definition of sustainability is different, and I’d do myself a favor by respecting that. But moreover, we can’t all be No Impact Man. (Plus, how does No Impact Man have a no-impact way to access the Internet? I’ve always wondered that.)

No matter what we do, we’re going to leave our mark on this planet. Organic packaged mac & cheese or not.

I know. I know. I was skeptical too. And I certainly wasn’t prepared to be impressed by the guys from Hemlock Printers, a Vancouver, B.C.-based commercial printing company, who stopped by our office on Monday to give a presentation called “Sustainability & the Print Industry.” After all, having a commitment to environmental responsibility and advocating for a better world aren’t typical print shop business goals. But then again, I found that Dick Kouwenhoven (president & CEO) and his son Richard (VP of digital solutions & fulfillment) aren’t your typical print shop guys.

The more they talked, the more I realized that the Kouwenhovens understand and celebrate the important relationship between industry and the environment. And more specifically, the print industry and the environment. Still skeptical? Luckily, these guys really do walk the talk when it comes to sustainable business practices, and they come with a nice track record from which to pull proof points. Have a look at a few examples:

• In the late 1980s, Hemlock was the first printer in Vancouver to remove isopropyl alcohol from press dampening systems
• In the mid 1990s, it fostered the creation of CleanPrint BC and its promotion of environmental management among various types of printers
• In 2004, Hemlock created an in-house Sustainability Committee to increase the momentum of improvements to environmental performance and to boost the introduction of sustainable business practices.
• For three years running (2006–2008) Hemlock has been named the Most Environmentally Progressive Printer in Canada for its efforts to position sustainability as a critical consideration in the company’s business strategy.

So, hats off to Hemlock for stepping up and being a true pioneer in an industry that could use more folks like the Kouwenhovens. Maybe it’s a good time to ask your print vendor how dedicated they are to environmental and social responsibility.

Environmentalists have been pushing for alternative energy for decades now, but let’s face it—the progress so far has been modest. The explanation is generally the same: it just doesn’t pencil out. There’s been too much cheap power from traditional sources, such as coal, oil and hydro power, to make solar, wind and geothermal economically viable. That’s starting to change, but not in the way many of us thought it would.

Specifically, green power advocates have long made the case that the government should spur the development of clean power technologies and infrastructure through tax incentives and direct research funding. But this position has gotten little real traction since President Reagan had Jimmy Carter’s solar panels removed from the roof of the White House upon assuming office in 1980.

A March 2008 White House fact sheet underscores the meager government support for alternative energy: "Since President Bush took office, the Federal Government has spent more than $12 billion to research, develop, and promote alternative energy sources." Compare this with the $70 billion recently pledged by just two American banks—Citigroup and Bank of America—for green initiatives over the next ten years. And many other investment banks are joining the fray, funding projects and research in unprecedented numbers.

In short, the private sector is rushing to finance the green power revolution, filling the void left by shrinking federal investment. Researchers at New Energy Finance report that total new investment in clean energy reached $148 billion in 2007, up 60 percent compared with 2006, and this trend seems likely to continue in the age of $4 gasoline.

Financial services firms will play a significant role in the transition from the carbon economy to one fueled by green power. Beyond simply underwriting the development of alternative energy, they will lead the way in assessing and managing the risks of investing in an economy altered by climate change. Our recent white paper, "A sustainable future for financial services," surveys the coming changes and highlights the communication challenges for firms looking to navigate the post-carbon economy. Take a look and send us your questions and comments.

There’s a subculture of technophiles who revel in the experience of opening new products. Lucky for us, they share their “unboxing” fun by recording the process and posting their videos on the internet for us all to, er, enjoy. Major tech companies have even held unboxing events, inviting their most faithful consumers to enjoy a group experience of simultaneous product discovery.

Honestly, unboxing kind of weirds me out, but I admit pulling a new purchase out of its box can trigger those pleasure centers in my brain usually exploited only on birthdays and gift-giving holidays.

But after that burst of unboxing ecstasy, what’s left? Nothing but the shell of something that was once so exciting and mysterious—a cardboard box that sits around your home for weeks until you’re forced to commit to the fact that you’re not going to return the product; plastic wrapping that you attempt to gather and throw away, but of which small pieces will undoubtedly reappear as invisible banana peels during a late night trip to the bathroom; and polyurethane crumbs that squeeze into the weaves of your carpet and the cracks of your hardwood and tile floors.

Fortunately, companies are coming around to the train of thought that all this waste isn’t necessary. There are alternatives, such as reducing packaging, reusable packaging or even lamps that are their own packaging. And HP is taking packaging in a new direction that not only creates less waste, but actually makes it useful.

HP’s Pavilion dv6929 Notebook PC comes not in a box, but in a trendy messenger bag. Switching the notebook PC packaging from a box to a bag (made of 100% recycled material to boot) reduces the packaging waste by 97%, and because three of these bagged PCs can fit into one box, it also cuts down on waste and energy consumption associated with shipping. Right now it’s only being offered at certain retail stores, but hopefully HP and other companies will shift to creative alternative packaging for all products in all retail stores.

And I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before the first “unbagging” video crosses my Internet path and weirds me out.