what you should be reading:
Wednesday
Dec012010

SEE What You're Buying Into-- Full Interview

The full interview unedited, of Michael Solomon, MD of SEE What You're Buying Into.

MSolomon_SEE by Annlytical

Some helpful bookmarks:

1.50 min gets good

5:00 min for Nestle story

7.30 min for the consultant like services and questionnaire process

20.00-24.00 min kinda dead-space, not too interesting

24.30 min for an example of how they have already used consumer feedback to challenge one of the businesses that carry their label

28.00 min for app details

Wednesday
Nov172010

Hear-say from the Good Deals 2010 conference

To me, it feels increasingly like social enterprise and co-production (co-design, too) is something the coaltion government is sticking its flag in-- conquering, if you will. I asked around, informally, and off-the-record at the Good Deals 2010 conference in London how socents feel about being re-branded as 'the Big Society.'

Here's what people said:

A few are suspicious of it, but for different reasons:  They are afraid the Conservative party is using the success of social enterprise and local solutions to devolve central government power to disastrous consequences.

A different few are suspicious because there just aren't yet enough details about what the 'Big Society' means-- particularly how it will play a useful role in small business. They aren't convinced by the Social Impact Bonds, particularly because they feel that who undertakes the risk isn't clear-- and simply repeating that returns are based on preformance isn't helping much (ok, that last bit is me).

A few people aren't suspicious at all and feel that if it helps to bring investment to social enterprise, then hooray!

So that's it. Qualified a little better? probably not.

Monday
May172010

Carbon Development Mechanism for the Everyman Ecopreneur

Sebastian Foot of Frontier Advisors, a CDM project brokering firm did an interview for me back in March about how he thought the UN's Carbon Development Mechanism (CDM) should be reformed.  It was a battle to get him to let me put up this audio chunk of the interview. 

everyman ecopreneur sebastian foot by Annlytical

 

You should know this interview is about 40 minutes long, in its original form.  And some of the comments printed in the article (the ones about the UN Executive Board in particular) are not here.  Foot repeatedly told me that he's "got a business to run" when we discussed putting up this audio.  But I wanted you all to hear it so you understand exactly what's at stake in the UNFCCC CDM reform-- Foot is a great interviewee, he's passionate and principled and that comes across in droves.  His vision of the way the CDM market should work is what I wanted you to hear.

 

Please leave your comments! Thanks!

Thursday
Apr292010

Touching Carbon: Carbon Calories, Carbon Shoes

John Henry Looney, PhD and Director of the sustainability consulting firm Sustainable Direction is a really interesting guy.  I interviewed him late last month for a piece about the gap between low-carbon pledges and low-carbon action.  The missing factor, according to most carbon consultants, is that carbon is intangible in a sense. Though oddly, I couldn't find statistics-- there's just episodic evidence that people pledge but don't go the mile. Could this be one of those things we know about other people because we know it about ourselves?

Anyway, take a listen to Looney as leads us through his calculations:

 


My editor cut the print portion of his Calorie explanation from my story-- a more interesting metric, in my opinion, than the shoe size.

Read here:

 

Looney began with the idea that to most people driving 10 miles is not a big deal. Driving a car 10 miles (assume 40-45 miles per gallon, 200 grams per kilometer) uses a litre (~ 0.22 gallons) of petrol and emits 3 kilograms of CO2; the energy output expressed in kilo Calories is 10,000 kCal.  Kilo Calories, it is often forgotten, was originally intended as heat energy metric.

Looney says, “It’s just a way of getting people to think through and look at it, in my view, in a-- and I’m not going to use the word paradigm shift, because that’s a jargon business word-- but I’m trying to get people to look at it differently, … so people understand the difference.”

For a woman in the US or UK, the daily recommended caloric intake is 2,000 kCals (2,500 for a man).  Further, 2,000 kCals a day is the amount recommended to maintain weight. But, Looney explains, if you do moderate physical labour (for example, working outdoors) you use about an extra 1,000 kCals a day.  If the caloric intake for men and women is roughly averaged to make for easy mathematics, that’s 3,300 kCals a day, into 10,000 kCal of energy is 3 days worth of energy.  The minimum wage in Britain is a little less than £6 (~$9.10), and the wages for 3 days of working 8 hour days, is equal to £144 (~$218.51). In other words, according to Looney, driving a car 10 miles costs loosely, £144 (~$218.51).

It’s not a far leap to suggest that the price for gas should be higher, says Looney, “The reason being… you spend a huge amount of energy chopping wood and we just now turn on the gas and we get a whole pile of wood energy, more or less straight away. And of course that wood equivalent-- you had trees you had to chop down and haul and stack and put in the fire place, there’s a lot of energy to heat a house with a wood fire or even a coal fire, and if you go back to coal fires in America or Victorian Britain because the mining energy to get the coal out of the ground is massive.”

 

The inspiration for the story:

The IPPR did a report last year, that talked about how to "market" low-carbon lifestyles to affluent apathetic people in order to increase low-carbon lifestyle uptake in the general population; in other words, how to create low-carbon market-makers. Amongst the suggestions is to call carbon emissions pollution, because pollution is dirty but emissions are invisible.  (Carbon Sense kind of gets at this pollution bit with their shapes). But Looney says that people don't really comprehend gases-- they do but there's still a bit of a disconnect.  So he came up with kCalories.  (See article on solveclimate.com)

 

One approach that almost but didn't make it into the article was a stock market approach.  The Environmental Investment Organization has several indexes that replace a certain percentage with low-carbon companies.  But instead of addressing people, they target market-maker investors.  They want them to replace 10% of their market-making portfolios with green companies by investing in their index.  Admirable, but I preferred to keep the story to a more personal level.

Wednesday
Apr282010

REA #GE2010 Energy Policy Comparison by Party

UPDATE: Unfortunately, I have recieved an email saying that the document is not for public consumption and is intended only to inform stakeholders and journalists.  It's my fault, as I did ask if it could be published, but a day went by with no answer so I figured it was fine, and then this morning I recieved an email asking me not to publish it. So that's it, I've taken it down.  Sorry. 

Again, see my previous notebook post for the partial transcript of my interview with the REA, which contains a general idea of what they think about each party's renewable energy policy.

 

Original post:

The REA (Renewable Energy Association, UK) released a side-by-side comparison of Liberal Democrat, Conservative, and Labour energy security policy. 

 

Oddly, it's not posted on their site, it just says "call to request a copy."  I emailed them to ask if there were any restrictions on circulation as it doesn't say anything on the document. I got no answer so it must be fine. So have at it, blogosphere.

 

As a reminder, my interview notes for my article on the Tory renewable energy policy can be found in my previous reporter's_notebook post.