There has been a mixed bag of reactions to the Australian Prime  Minister Kevin Rudd’ discussions about coal sales to China, clean coal and what some people are calling the hypocrisy of our mining and selling coal to China.

I agree that the entire world needs to move completely away from fossil fuels but I am also a pragmatist and I realise the size of the industry here and the huge damage it would do to our economy if we suddenly stopped so I believe that the coal industry’s research efforts into developing clean ways to use coal make sense.  And selling these technologies to China along with the coal also makes sense.

I know this makes some people very angry and someone recently said to me “clean coal – I’d like to see that!”  The problem with being angry about something is that the people who are angry stop communicating and only tell.  Unless the dialogue is two way, there is no communication and the differing viewpoints never meet to find the best outcome.  It is a bit like swimming in a rip – fight it and you drown.

I believe we need a mix of energy sources and would like to see large scale development of solar because we have so much sun in Australia and especially at times when demand for air-conditioning is greatest.  Our small scale domestic solar installations are very expensive to install and while great for the environment are out of the reach of most people.

The USA are installing very large scale and economic solar plants to power entire towns in Arizona and the large scale technology has been in use in California since the 198s and is well tested and reliable.  There is a process using huge amounts of salt that can store the solar heat to enable the power generation around the clock.

When wind, wave, solar and geothermal energy is in mainstream use and alternative technologies are developed and economically viable together with attitudes and behavioural change we will able to reduce our energy use without much changing out quality of life.  At that time the cost of coal and oil will rise to become uneconomical unless they can be audited as having worked out how to effective reduce their emissions.  Their incentive will be the cost of their carbon emissions.

There are other very exciting new technologies emerging for retrofitting established buildings to make them energy efficient.  I suspect there needs to be support to get these out into more visible demonstration sites.

Developing these technologies, including clean coal, and reducing dependence on coal and oil requires a national and global vision plus implementation and incentives.

Humans are very good at change and adaptation when they know their backs are against the wall but the problem is they do not all recognise the need for action now.

There is a growing consumer concern about climate change and increasing demand for “green” products.  Consumers are waking up to the need to look after the environment and marketers are jumping madly on the bandwagon.

Marketers sell on emotion so they often stretch the truth to build that very emotion that connects with the buyers.  It is their job.

Up to 50% of Australians will now investigate the origins of a product or service, and will pay more for a product that they believe is from a sustainable source.  This is the crux of the problem.  THEY BELIEVE it is sustainable.

All this confusion about what “green” really means is spawning a wide range of environmental certifications; generally product certifications.  There is confusion about what they all mean and whether and what quality any auditing has. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has launched a crackdown on green claims with the release of its guidelines, Green Marketing and the Trade Practices Act, in November 2007. Under the act, there is maximum fine of $1.2 million for companies engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct.

The ACCC is already taking court action against car manufacturer Saab. Saab, being Swedish actually has a green production and management system but the marketers went too far.  Woolworths has changed its packaging of Woolworths Select tissue products after an ACCC probe. An ACCC spokesman says that while large companies have been targeted so far, smaller businesses will be the subject of future investigations.  That includes all of us.
While a product may be certified green by some organisation, it is more satisfactory to say, as so many overseas brands do, “produced by an ISO 14001 certified business” than trying to dream up various new standards. This is because the international standard for environmental management practices, ISO 14001 certifies that the business you are buying from has considered all its significant environmental impacts, including product and energy impacts of obtaining and handling all the products and services and can demonstrate that these are managed in a sustainable manner.  ISO 14001 also brings real benefits to the individual business by increasing its efficiency and improving its environmental impacts.

Once we get into carbon, we come up with another “bag of worms”.  The ACCC is set to release additional guidelines in the coming months for claims relating to carbon offsets, representing a reduction of greenhouse gases, and carbon neutrality, where the carbon emissions of the company or a product or service are negated by offsets.  Interestingly, if you look on the web the airlines vary enormously in their reporting of the greenhouse gas emissions of the same aircraft flying the same route and in fact it does vary every trip depending on things like loaded weight, weather condition and time spent circling airports because of air traffic congestion.

The issues include the integrity of carbon offsets and measurement of the initial carbon emissions. A common mistake people make is to claim carbon neutrality for a product when the company has only considered emissions during manufacturing and not the total life cycle, which includes use and disposal.  And this does not even touch on some of the tree planting practices to claim carbon credits.  Some schemes are well run but others are not.

Last week a bunch of drunks decided to steal a work-boat and go for a joyride on the harbour after midnight. Six of them died when they hit a fishing boat on its way to sea to do a days (or night’s) work. We hear a lot about what wonderful people they are but they were drinking at a pub, stole a boat and went joyriding with 14 people in a boat surveyed for 8!

I have deep sympathy for the bereaved families BUT my major sympathy goes to the fishermen who were terribly traumatized by this accident and to both boat owners who have lost a vital part of their business, possibly for months while the Coroner investigates the two, now impounded, boats.

Poor business owners is my take on this. I do and have done a lot of work on occupational safety in the fishing industry and I know how seriously fishers take this.  Sorry if I offend anyone but I was horrified by the behaviour of these 14 people. What goes around!

One of the very important parts of Module 1 in Enviro Action’s training program is about understanding and managing your need for environmental compliance.

Companies and managers face increasing liability from a range of environmental laws. The new National Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reporting Act 2007 is the latest.

The fact is that we need to comply with legislation in our business as well as  in the rest of our live.  If you drive over the speed limit with a hight alcohol level you do not expect sysmpathy when you get caught.  Similarly with environmental law.

The worry for business is whether they are at risk from their employees and their contractors inadvertently breaking the law and leaving the owners and managers liable.   This is an area tha tneeds to be taken seriously and Enviro Action can help here.

Last week Enviro Action had a stand at the Carbon Trading Expo in Melbourne. it was combined with a major safety expo and was a huge event. The number of people coming through was almost overwhelming. Thankfully I had two wonderful guys helping me.

Enviro Action is about reducing carbon and other environmental impacts which is the major step we need to take. We were very busy & I also spoke at the conference.

It was most interesting seeing what is on offer. The entire carbon trading area is still in a premature muddle with a mixture of tree planters and others. The auditing requirements are not yet set, the tree planters, while mainly very well meaning need to be clear on both how much carbon they really sequester and from when, the effect a bushfire will have on their operation and very importantly the ecological impact of their planting and what the ecology was of the land they are planting on. There are some horror stories about unsuitable trees being planted on what was an natural ecology that did not “look like forest” but actually worked better than the artificial community put there with wrong species.

I am NOT against tree planting and as a member of a volunteer group in the past, have planted thousands. I have responsibly collected local seed, dried it (taking over almost the entire northern side of a previous house I owned) and direct seeds and well as tending tube stock.

I have been a member of Trees for Life for around 15 years and am now a sponsor because I like the fact that they collect local seed, work with local landowners and are very ecologically responsible. But i fail to see how you can do accurate carbon accounting on this even though it is very good for the environment and the planedt.

The first 300 Australian companies start mandatory carbon reporting on July1. Interesting times. The figures will eventually be put on public view.  It is estimated that businesses will have to spend $7bn on rebuilding corporate computer systems and overhauling workplaces to meet the federal government’s new greenhouse gas emission reporting requirements.

The real issue is reduction and there is a huge interest in this. The accountancy firms are taking on more people in their sustainability and assurance services and accounting sooftware firms like MYOB are apparently exploring how to help facilitate the process.

The big emitters like coal and oil are lobbying hard to try to be exempted ye gods! Predictable but ludicrous if they get away with it. I guess the big dilemma for the Labour government is their dual commitment to the people who voted them in for their perceived “green” credentials and promise to sign Kyoto vs their huge membership in the outer suburbs where there is limited public transport, major mortgage stress and petrol prices are very sensitive.

We need a combination of awareness, behavioural change, and some technology.

Programs like my Module 1 where I teach you to mind-map your activities develop a greater awareness and help plan for the behavioural changes needed.

The problem is our habits and our resistance to change and this is where technology helps and the simple, low cost technologies that help us change our habits does already exist.

In some hotels we have a slot to put a card in that turns off all the power except essentials like the fridge. This would be great in every house and workplace with just some designated power points left live.

Our Video/DVD recorders need to be made with a battery &/or some form of “trickle” to keep the date and time set - or else a gadget that we can plug them into to do this. It is not practical to turn them off at the wall because it induces “video time set rage”.

In a work environment, people who work late could have a pass-card to turn on their desk and the lighting could be based on motion detectors so the rest of the lights are off when not in use.

This technology does exist and would save enough to pay for its installation.

Technorati Tags: energy, energy savings, behavioural change, awareness, low cost technologies, changing our habits

It is very interesting that the organisers have managed to make this much more of an interactive forum than most conferences I have been to previously. My personal feeling is that the methods they are using of having short content rich talks on a topic with no immediate questions, then a much longer forum for the last third of the session in some cases; in another case – a full session of forum; and yet another a café style interaction; is very much more respectful of a room full of additional minds that can be brought to problems rather than needing to be passively lectured to be an “expert”. It allows the expert and the audience opportunities to take topics further and gain more insights.

The café style interaction is very interesting and would be a very useful tool for community consultation and it is no coincidence it is being used in the 2-day stream on communication risk. The first session, which I had the honour of chairing, was more conventional with 5 x15 minute speakers followed by an interactive forum but it has been followed by sessions with 1 speaker then a question put to the session to be discussed in groups of 4 around small tables. One person at each table is the host and makes sure the group is recorded. Everyone is encouraged to write or draw their concepts on the A3 page, then all except the host move and go on considering the same question with a new group. At the end, the table host briefly summarises the discussion for the entire group and the pages are handed in.

This is a really interesting tool for public consultation. People do hear each other and be heard in a much less threatening environment than in a public meeting where the two extreme ends of the opinion bell curve try hard to influence the silent majority in the middle. People hear other views and a mind stretched never returns fully to where it was.

The last session tonight included food and drinks so the atmosphere was most enjoyable and made a very long day into a pleasant atmosphere to keep working

Jean’s clients, Australian Bight Abalone is an ABALONE farm off the South Australia’s West Coast is the first aquaculture project in Australia - and possibly the world - to achieve an official carbon-neutral …

Read the story on news.com.au

They have already implemented ISO 14001, ISO 9001, Occupational health and safety (AS/NZS 4801) and HACCP. Look at their case study.

http://enviroaction.com.au/bight_abalone.html

These Guys are impressive and a joy to work with!

Technorati Tags: Australian Bight Abalone, Abalone, Abalone farm, South Australia’s West Coast, carbon neutral, ISO 14001, ISO 9001, Occupational health and safety

Albert Einstein once said “we can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them”. Applying this to today’s sustainability challenge would read “we are not going to rebalance the economy and ecology using economic decision support tools like cost benefit analysis, regardless of how ‘rigorous’ or ’scientific’ they purport to be”.

All environmental problems stem from a single cause – our systems of production and consumption are out of sync with the ecology of the planet. As a result major ecosystems are in decline and we are undermining our own ability to thrive, let alone the untold damage inflicted on other species.

But what about the cost?
The discussion on cost as opposed to value is a problem because at present it is not part of our main stream thinking.. It is not possible to go to the corner store and purchase $2.50 worth of improved biodiversity, or water catchment protection, or salinity control, etc. Spending money on what is essential to our resource and lifestyle security is counted as a cost.

Conversely you can happily buy $2.50 worth of nutritionless caffeinated beverage that arguably accelerates obesity, diabetes and dental decay but this is considered to be necessary expenditure - not a cost.

Go Figure! We need a mindset change.

Technorati Tags: thinking outside the square, Albert Einstein, sustainability challenge, economy, ecology, environment, environmental problems, biodiversity