Safeway has become a founding member of the Sustainability Consortium, the group launched in support of Wal-Mart’s Sustainability Index.

The goal of the consortium is to develop guidelines and promote innovations as the supply chain seeks to reduce its energy use, emissions and packaging. The consortium made headlines in January when Wal-Mart and Best Buy, together with electronics suppliers Dell, HP, Intel and Toshiba, officially launched the effort.

The consortium is administered by Arizona State University and the University of Arkansas, with financial support from Wal-Mart.

The consortium has courted Safeway, in hopes that it would become involved in what could be an industry wide sustainability metric system.

Safeway made its involvement in the initiative public March 1, reports Supermarket News. Safeway is the first grocer to join the group, according to a press release.

The retailer will use life cycle assessment data to create a company-wide supply chain policy encouraging sustainable purchasing and manufacturing practices throughout the organization’s direct and indirect buying.

Colorado Carbon Fund Advisory Committee Meeting

The Colorado Carbon Fund’s Advisory Committee meets Monday, March 1 from 2-4 pm at the GEO office.

The Agenda includes:

• An update on Colorado Carbon Fund marketing and plans for 2010.
• An introduction to Ben Vitale, the new president of The Climate Trust, our partners in managing the Fund and finding high quality projects.
• An Executive Session review of proposals received during the RFP for solar hot water systems. This portion of the meeting will be closed to the public.

If you’d like to listen in by webinar, please register online.

To attend in person, please contact
Susan Innis

“SAN DIEGO, California, February 20, 2010 (ENS) – A panel of eminent U.S. and European scientists has confirmed the widespread scientific consensus that the Earth’s climate is warming due to human activities, but said they and their colleagues should have responded more quickly and effectively to news of an error in a major climate report and hacked researcher e-mails.

“In a symposium Friday at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement Science, AAAS, the scientific leaders acknowledged errors in a 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and possibly impolitic email exchanges by East Anglian University climate researchers.

“”But they expressed shock at the political effects of the disclosures and said the impact was far out of proportion to the overwhelming evidence that human activity is changing the Earth’s climate.

Jerry North (Photos by Edward Lempenin courtesy AAAS)

“There has been no change in the scientific community, no change whatsoever,” in the consensus that global average temperatures have been steadily climbing since the mid-20th century,” said Jerry North, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University.

“The panel also included: Ralph Cicerone, president of the National Academies of Science and chair of the National Research Council; Lord Martin Rees, president of the Royal Society in the U.K.; James J. McCarthy, chairman of the AAAS Board; Alexander Agassiz, professor of Biological Oceanography at Harvard University; and Philip Sharp; a Nobel laureate and professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

“Some climate science critics and media reports have suggested that the e-mails, stolen from an East Anglican University server and released last November, show evidence of tinkering with climate change data. But many scientists say comments from the emails were taken out of context and used in misleading ways.

“An independent investigation is ongoing. The Royal Society will provide advice to the University of East Anglia in identifying assessors to conduct an independent external reappraisal of the Climatic Research Unit’s key publications.

“

Lord Martin Rees

“Rees said on February 12, “It is important that people have the utmost confidence in the science of climate change. Where legitimate doubts are raised about any piece of science they must be fully investigated – that is how science works. The names being put forward by the society will be acting as individuals, not representatives of the Society and the Society will have no oversight of this independent review.”

“In January, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations organization that has involved thousands of scientists from around the world in producing four major reports since the 1990s, acknowledged that it had included unsubstantiated data on Himalayan glacier melting in a 2007 report.

“Cicerone said “the appearance, if not the reality,” of a rift within the research community has “corroded” the climate debate in a way that “may spread over to other kinds of science.”

James J. McCarthy

“”Scientists need to redouble their efforts to share the implications of climate change with the public, he said, by breaking down the numbers and showing how the often-cited global average temperature rise of three degrees Centigrade could actually send temperatures over the land soaring nearly to nearly nine degrees in the next few decades.

“”A lot of what we need to do,” said Cicerone, “is translate basic information into terms the public can understand.

“Several of the scientists acknowledged that some of the details of climate change remain uncertain. But “we think despite all the uncertainties … action is justified and indeed imperative” to avoid the worst effects of climate change, said Rees.

“The IPCC conclusions are subject to rigorous peer review. Indeed, said Rees, some IPCC researchers did catch the erroneous statement that accelerated melting could lead to the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers by 2035. Still, the error slipped through.

“McCarthy, who formerly served as co-chair of an IPCC working group, predicted that the organization would certainly redouble its efforts to catch mistakes in the future.

Sunset in Germany, July 29, 2009 (Photo by Juergen Kuprat)

“He said the IPCC’s prestigious reputation as a Nobel Peace Prize winning organization was a factor in many news reports. “The greater the stature of the institution,” he said, “the harder the fall.”

“Some scientists were also not prepared to discuss the data in ways that were useful to the press and public, said North. While the diversity of data – from pollen samples to satellite data to computer modeling – is a key strength of climate change conclusions, the “culture” of each discipline is equally varied, he said.

“”Some of these [groups] are not really well organized to handle relations with the press,” North said.

“Climate change is “diffuse and international and remote in time,” two special hurdles that make it “very hard to get the public exercised on the matter,” said Rees.

“Wider access and transparency for research data is a step toward better communication, Cicerone said. The National Academies released a report last year on building specific standards for sharing research more broadly with scientific colleagues and the public.

“The controversy will probably play only a small role whether the U.S. Congress will pass a climate change law this year, said McCarthy and Cicerone, who said Americans remain more concerned about a sluggish economy than about climate change.

“So far, McCarthy said, scientists have not done “a sufficiently good job” of persuading the American people and their congressional representatives of the potential economic and health benefits of a comprehensive climate change law.”

We applaud the development of alternative energies but add this caveat for all supporters: it will be an extraordinary feat if the percentage of alternative energy powering the world’s grid comes anywere close to reaching five percent of supply in the next 20 years.

That brings us to the subject of power plants. Here are some power plant facts, according to the PowerPlantCCS website: 

“There are over 50,000 power plants in the world. These power plants constitute the single largest emitting industry for CO₂ emissions.”

One solution for solving this problem: carbon capture and sequestration, one of the reasons the PowerPlantCCS website was launched. The site provides a report, starting with CO2:

“Carbon dioxide is the most common greenhouse gas after water vapor. Burning fossil fuels, land clearing and other activities of modern industrial society have caused the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to climb from about 280 parts per million to 380 parts per million, causing warming and other climate changes.

“From 1991 to 2000, CO₂ accounted for 82% of total U.S. GHG emissions in terms of its global warming potential. About 96% of these carbon emissions resulted from the combustion of fossil fuels for energy. With the increased emphasis on GHG abatement, it is imperative that these power plants undertake serious efforts to cut down their CO₂ emitted and sequester it.”

Now comes an argument for carbon capture:

“Energy efficiency improvements and switching from fossil fuels toward less carbon intensive energy sources were once seen as the only realistic means of reducing carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. In recent years, however, analysts and policymakers have begun to recognize the potential for a third option—the development of “end-of-pipe” technologies that would allow for the continued utilization of fossil fuel energy sources while significantly reducing carbon emissions. “

Whether pro or con, there are numerous developments in this field — some that appear to provide plausible solutions that may help abate global warming. To help with the development of technologies like these, one of the best tyools available will be active involvement from a population that understand far more about global warming than it presently does.

Don’t miss this opportunity to network and share resources and best practices with industry leaders and experts, and your peers.
For more information visit:
www.awea.org/events/supplychain4

“I am issuing a challenge for the year 2010: Build out a 100 acre turnkey algae production facility (growing, harvesting and extraction) without any local, state or federal grant funds.”

Mr. Cohen’s greeting to all for the beginning of 2010 is well worth reading, especially by all who want to see alternative fuels gain more solid footing on the American (and world) energy charts.

The accounting of his challenge ias worth the read:

“When this (American oil production) all started in 1859, nobody had all of the answers. 150 years later, the oil industry is still looking for answers. A 100 acre turn-key commercial-scale algae production facility will allow algae producers to look at real commercial algae production and operations as well as economies of scale issues. It will give algae researchers a much better understanding of commercial-scale algae production issues to work on as opposed to small raceway ponds and desk-top lab photobioreactors. It is, at this point, useless to continue to fund algae research without seriously funding commercial-scale algae production farms. As some have already learned, intellectual properties have no practical use if there is not an industry to use them. In order to create any value in existing algae technologies, we must have commercial-scale algae production facilities that can use them!

“Commercial-scale algae production is key to our industry and is one solution that helps to reduce dependence on foreign oil, to create new jobs and reduce CO2 emissions. The NAA challenges the algae industry to build a 100 acre commercial-scale algae production plant without any local, state or federal grants – this will be the true test of algae production farming and algaepreneurism at its finest!

“I would like to see the first 50 acres of production with proven benchmarked results – totally designed, developed and put into production without a single dollar of government money. The next 50 acres can be improved by making minor changes based on what was learned from the first 50 acres. I know it can be done, and you know it can be done – it´s time to do it!”

The entire document can be read at the association’s website .

Source: Cleantech Group

“Venture capital investments in green technology companies declined by 33 percent from $8.5 billion in 2008 to $5.6 billion in 2009, despite a flurry of government subsidies for renewable energy, according to a preliminary report by the Cleantech Group and Deloitte,” the Environmental Leader post stated.

As to the numbers, investments in green technology companies declined from $8.5 billion in 2008 to $5.6 billion in 2009. The decline would have been worse except for a flurry of government subsidies that were made for renewable energy.

For more detail on this report, visit either Fort Collins, CO – based Environmental Leader or The New York Times’ Green Inc. blog.

Mark Edwards, PhD

For those wanting more information on algae and its low-carbon potential as an alternative fuel source, take a visit to Oilgae , a blog focused on this subject.

Some might even want information on how to grow their own. Below are clips from today’s post:

“Cultivation of Algae in Photobioreactor”

“Algae can also be grown in a photobioreactor (PBR). A PBR is a bioreactor which incorporates some type of light source. Virtually any translucent container could be called a PBR, however the term is more commonly used to define a closed system, as opposed to an open tank or pond.

“It allows more species to be grown, it allows the species that are being grown to stay dominant, and it extends the growing season, only slightly if unheated, and if heated it can produce year round. Because PBR systems are closed, all essential nutrients must be introduced into the system to allow algae to grow and be cultivated.

“A PBR can be operated in “batch mode”, but it is also possible to introduce a continuous stream of sterilized water containing nutrients, air, and carbon dioxide. As the algae grows, excess culture overflows and is harvested.”

The entire article is available at at the Oilgae blog. I happened on this site on the recommendation of a friend who is attempting to link me with Mark Edwards, PhD, professor at the Morrison School of Management and Agribusiness at Arizona State University, and author of “Green Algae Strategy: End Oil Imports And Engineer Sustainable Food And Fuel.”

I am glad to have visited and think it is important for many of us to learn more about this alternative, sharing our discoveries with plenty of others.

]]> http://ourgreenstreetsblog.com/wordpress/2010/01/make-a-visit-to-oilgae/feed/ 0 http://ourgreenstreetsblog.com/wordpress/2009/12/lessons-on-sustainability/ http://ourgreenstreetsblog.com/wordpress/2009/12/lessons-on-sustainability/#comments Thu, 31 Dec 2009 17:54:42 +0000 Bevan Suits http://ourgreenstreetsblog.com/wordpress/?p=828 Note: This opinion on sustainability is submitted by guest writer, Bevan Suits, founder of Access to Aquaponics (http://accesstoaquaponics.com/).

Sustainability is a state of balance. We see it in nature every day but we don’t notice it until something goes haywire. Take the Dust Bowl for example. In the early 1900s, cattle ranching across the Great Plains began to be replaced by cultivation. With new efficient technologies, farmers were able to plow vast areas of virgin prairie. They didn’t realize that the grass was essential to the ecosystem. The grass and twelve inches of topsoil was a skin that held in place the soil and moisture below. Removing it was preparation for a huge disaster. Erosion began to wash the soil away and all of the nutrients with it.

Beginning in 1930, drought allowed the soil to become dry dust. Over the next few years, a series of windstorms took the dust to the skies and the US experienced an ecological and economic catastrophe. Millions of tons of soil darkened the skies of the eastern US all the way to New England. In some areas of the Great Plains, day was turned to night by the “black blizzards” that reduced visibility to inches, destroying a way of life and an ecosystem only inches in depth.

This was perhaps our first hard lesson in sustainability. The US government stepped in to promote better farming methods and work on rehabilitating the land. The big word then was not sustainability but conservation.

We experienced on a very large scale how new, powerful farming technology, and the desire for profit, tipped the scales toward imbalance, with disastrous results for economy and ecology. This lesson did sink in, but not much beyond better ways to plow. Grass was still just grass.

Sustainability exists all around us in the ecology and the economy. It is a state of balance that is ordinary and invisible. We don’t appreciate it until things big things fall apart. In the fall of 2008, the economy was in a “free fall”. We were looking for the “bottom”, another way of saying sustainability. It seems to have leveled out, but we are reminded that our man-made economy follows natural laws of balance, and we seem to have a lot to learn.

Only 80 years after the Dust Bowl, we’re pressured to think and act smarter. We are smarter, but the question is this: “Who is driving?” Unfortunately, it’s too often the corporate mind-set that values short-term profit over long-term sustainable returns, which includes profit along with quality of life benefits.  The concept of just enough is spun into anti-business.

Our economic condition is our latest lesson on sustainability. Hopefully we are gaining a larger awareness of how things are connected that will help us make better decisions. This awareness is what’s behind the interest in local food, a building block of economics that has been lost. The interest in local food drives the interest in aquaponics, a technology that grows fish and vegetables in the same system. It has the capacity to deliver a lot of food quickly in a small space.

If you consider the history of agricultural technology, it’s all been about cultivating increasing acreage with greater efficiency. Aquaponics breaks the mold and provides a solution based on concentrated yields in portable or fixed containers. It’s a scalable system that can be delivered and installed most anywhere at a very low cost.

Aquaponics is sustainable technology that doesn’t seem to have a downside. It has a lot to teach. May I suggest it is worth your time to look into it.