Scientists discover another cause of bee deaths, and it's really bad news : TreeHugger:
The ABCs of colony collapse among Bees appears to be really, really ugly. Well, it has been ugly, but know we know a little more about it, vs. being mainly in the dark.
This current research seems to find that a combination of pesticides and fungicides reduces the immune system of bees.
This story summarizing the research is just filled with horrible little nuggets. On average the bee pollen they studied had 9 different special ingredients in the pollen cocktails taken live from California.
Worse, much of the pollen comes from the "wild", not harvest crops.
However, finally knowing more about the cause will help hugely in addressing this critical issue (for diversity and food crops).
Remedies of better use and control of pesticides/fungicides seems obvious. But organic methods should help a little or a LOT.
'via Blog this'
Monday, April 14, 2014
Thursday, April 10, 2014
Coming to a Couch Near You: A New Wave of Telecommuting
Coming to a Couch Near You: A New Wave of Telecommuting:
Very cool discussion about Telecommuting. And Traffic.
I just saw stats on the worst commutes in America. (several different ways to slice n dice it). One stat was the average person spends a bout a week per year (38 hours) in traffic. I have no idea where Mr Average lives, cause the rest of us used to ring up that many commuting hours in 2 to 4 weeks. An hour to work each way will clock you in at 40 hours within a given month.
But don't move to DC or LA or SF or hour time in traffic meter will max out!
Before the recession there were 4 or 5 Metros in Florida that were in the top 10 for worst commutes in the USofA. Now all I find (2011) is Miami with #22 and Tampa with 39.
'via Blog this'
Very cool discussion about Telecommuting. And Traffic.
I just saw stats on the worst commutes in America. (several different ways to slice n dice it). One stat was the average person spends a bout a week per year (38 hours) in traffic. I have no idea where Mr Average lives, cause the rest of us used to ring up that many commuting hours in 2 to 4 weeks. An hour to work each way will clock you in at 40 hours within a given month.
But don't move to DC or LA or SF or hour time in traffic meter will max out!
Before the recession there were 4 or 5 Metros in Florida that were in the top 10 for worst commutes in the USofA. Now all I find (2011) is Miami with #22 and Tampa with 39.
'via Blog this'
Friday, April 4, 2014
13 of 14 warmest years on record occurred in 21st century – UN | Environment
13 of 14 warmest years on record occurred in 21st century – UN | Environment | theguardian.com:
Ouch. As you look at the clock, you will see that we are only 14 years into the 21st Century. Yet we have 13 of the hottest 14 years in recorded history.
You do have to take the whole of the earth into account, obviously, not just the USA, where we were ?fortunate? enough to have a exceptionally cold and blizzardy Winter. (Polar Vortex is now in our daily vernacular.)
If you are interested in the science go here to look at the 11 or 12 major indicators (based on several data sources each) that would indicate global warming. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record
If you want a composite graphic that shows the robustness of the evidence, go here. There are several data sources overlaid in each graphic. Note that the stratosphere is decreasing (cooler), that is consistent with a depletion of the ozone layer.
The recent UN report talks about the trends in costs associated with climate effects, like typhoons. A draft report talks about $1.45T costs associated with climate change over the next decade. (See here http://www.livescience.com/43891-global-warming-economic-damage.html.)
The costs are expected to reach $70 to $100B per year for adaptation by 2050. (See here: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/03/31/will-the-uns-new-report-shift-the-global-warming-debate)
NASA has lots of interesting graphics, including time-series that will show the world temperature changes over the last couple hundred years. (Or just recently if you want since 1970).(The science visualization study at NASA is awesome, no mater what your interests: http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/Gallery/index.html or if you want to draw your own graphs based on the underlying data, go here: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global/globe/land_ocean/3/2/1880-2014).
As we come up on Earth Day (EarthDay.org or EarthDay in Wikipedia) the impacts of business as usual (BAS) really revolves around whether you think something should be done to be much more sustainable NOW!, in decades or in centuries to come.
The degree of urgency really depends on how much you believe in global warming, and how fast you think that warming may take place.
Look at the graphs and make your own call on this.
'via Blog this'
Ouch. As you look at the clock, you will see that we are only 14 years into the 21st Century. Yet we have 13 of the hottest 14 years in recorded history.
You do have to take the whole of the earth into account, obviously, not just the USA, where we were ?fortunate? enough to have a exceptionally cold and blizzardy Winter. (Polar Vortex is now in our daily vernacular.)
If you are interested in the science go here to look at the 11 or 12 major indicators (based on several data sources each) that would indicate global warming. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record
If you want a composite graphic that shows the robustness of the evidence, go here. There are several data sources overlaid in each graphic. Note that the stratosphere is decreasing (cooler), that is consistent with a depletion of the ozone layer.
The recent UN report talks about the trends in costs associated with climate effects, like typhoons. A draft report talks about $1.45T costs associated with climate change over the next decade. (See here http://www.livescience.com/43891-global-warming-economic-damage.html.)
The costs are expected to reach $70 to $100B per year for adaptation by 2050. (See here: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/03/31/will-the-uns-new-report-shift-the-global-warming-debate)
NASA has lots of interesting graphics, including time-series that will show the world temperature changes over the last couple hundred years. (Or just recently if you want since 1970).(The science visualization study at NASA is awesome, no mater what your interests: http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/Gallery/index.html or if you want to draw your own graphs based on the underlying data, go here: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global/globe/land_ocean/3/2/1880-2014).
As we come up on Earth Day (EarthDay.org or EarthDay in Wikipedia) the impacts of business as usual (BAS) really revolves around whether you think something should be done to be much more sustainable NOW!, in decades or in centuries to come.
The degree of urgency really depends on how much you believe in global warming, and how fast you think that warming may take place.
Look at the graphs and make your own call on this.
'via Blog this'
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
A Car Costs a Lot More Than You Think - WSJ.com
Mercedes or Ford, a Car Costs a Lot More Than You Think - WSJ.com:
Here's the breakdown of a car expenses is about $9,000 per year: Pretty Car Chart illustration
TELECOMMUTING
We know that the full cost (savings really) of someone telecommuting is more like $30,000 per year. That's the company (some $23k savings/year), to the individual and to the community (more roads). That's before introducing the concept of cost of an employee's (leisure) time.
* SustainZine blogs on Telecommuting
* SustainZine blogs on Workshift
* Transportation Humor, kinda.
'via Blog this'
Here's the breakdown of a car expenses is about $9,000 per year: Pretty Car Chart illustration
- 39% is depreciation
- 35% is associated with the miles driven: fuel, oil, tires, etc.
That's 3/4 of the cost of a car, if you are only driving 15,000 per year.
Insurance, finance charges and tag/taxes are about 10% each.
Time is not included here, but it should be if commuting is the reason for all of the 15,000 miles traveled.
A car may cost a lot more than you think, but it also cost a LOT more than WSJ thinks it costs.
A car may cost a lot more than you think, but it also cost a LOT more than WSJ thinks it costs.
TELECOMMUTING
We know that the full cost (savings really) of someone telecommuting is more like $30,000 per year. That's the company (some $23k savings/year), to the individual and to the community (more roads). That's before introducing the concept of cost of an employee's (leisure) time.
* SustainZine blogs on Telecommuting
* SustainZine blogs on Workshift
* Transportation Humor, kinda.
'via Blog this'
Sunday, March 23, 2014
World Water Day Quiz?
All,
World water day slipped by without a splash! http://www.unwater.org/worldwaterday/
Check the blog here on the topic: World Water Day 2014 blog post.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and plastics.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and paper.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and trash.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and clothes (say cotton pants).
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and food... (virtual water).
Quick quiz:
Key: Out of about 100% correct, where do you stand?
World water day slipped by without a splash! http://www.unwater.org/worldwaterday/
Check the blog here on the topic: World Water Day 2014 blog post.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and plastics.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and paper.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and trash.
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and clothes (say cotton pants).
Most people don't realize the Nexus of water and energy and food... (virtual water).
Quick quiz:
- How much of the earth's water is available fresh water (like rivers, streams and fresh lakes)?
- What percentage of the bottled water we drink is from a municipal water source (i.e., fine Miami tap-water)?
- How many gallons of water (typically) does it take to power a light bulb per year (in the US, based on 12 hrs per day, 60w incandescent)?
- How many gallons of water does it take to make a serving of cereal? of beef? of cotton clothes?
- How many gallons of water does the average (per capita) American use per day? All things considered, how much water per day?
Key: Out of about 100% correct, where do you stand?
- 5% right? Low average. You probably should know a little more about our earth systems.
- 10% right? About average. You probably should know a little more about our earth systems.
- 20% right? Above average. Pretty good! You probably should know a little more about our earth systems.
- 30% right? You read too much or you are a closet environmentalist.
- 40% right? Genius and a full fledged environmentalist. You probably should be blogging about sustainability issues.
- 50% or more right? No... You cheated! You looked up the answers and were actually lucky enough to find sources that were accurate/right!
Saturday, March 22, 2014
World Water Day 2014 -- March 22
Welcome to the World
Water Day of 2014: This
year’s theme is Water & Energy.
By
the Way: Earth Day is coming in a month, April 22!!!
Look for Seminar information.
Look for Seminar information.
See the 2011
SustainZine post related to World Water Day.
Some info is borrowed here.
World Water Day
World Water Day can easily flooded past us without
most of us hearing a drop about it.!:-( And
why is that, you may be wondering? Or not… The problem with this, and most
things sustainability related, is where to start. And how do we put the critical sustainability
issue of water onto our daily radar screen.
Water,
Water, Everywhere…
Water, so critical to life can be devastating in its
absence. It can be devastating in abundance. Australia, plagued with decades of
drought, finally got rain in 2011: it had an area flooded the size of Germany
and France combined! This was followed
in February with Cyclone Yasi in the northeast. (A cyclone is the Pacific version of a hurricane… and, yes, they went
through the alphabet to get to Y.) We know a lot about hurricanes for two years
starting in 2004 giving us in Florida 3 or 4 per year including Katrina that
also hit New Orleans.
Then in the Winter of 2013-2014 we got snow, and
more snow (let’s call that a polar vortex). In the meantime Europe (England) got
drowned in rain.
But the quiet pain associated with water is very
easily preventable with very little money. More than 1 billion of our world’s
6.9B population have inadequate drinking water with an additional 1B having
inadequate sanitation. The result is that more than 3.5 million people die each
year because of easily preventable water-related diseases (World Health
Organization at www.WHO.int).
Approximately half of the world’s
hospital beds are taken by water and hygiene-related diseases (http://water.org/learn-about-the-water-crisis/facts/). [This should be updated, it has improved
since 2011.]
The
Nexus of Energy with Water, Paper, Plastic and Transportation.
Few people realize how much water it takes to
produce energy. How much water to power a light bulb, for example? To power a
60 watt bulb 12 hours per day for a year? How about 3,000 to 6,000, depending
on the power source, it could be more or less. See here.
The water doesn't go away, per se. Water might be
taken in upstream, used to produce steam and power turbines and then released
downstream. Give a look at the Nexus
sections in the outline on the last page of Climate Changes and Sustainability, a
WikiBook: http://tinyurl.com/SustainYBook
Power and the Nexus of Energy, Water,
Paper, Plastic, etc. are discussed in Wikipdedia:
World
Water Day
World Water Day was initiated to try to solve health
and wellness problems around the world where people have poor water and
sanitation. The UN has a 10 year program to attempt to overcome the pain and
death associated with inadequate water by 2015. Progress has been made, but it
is slow.
WATER STATS: Most of
the earth’s surface (70%+) is water. Yet only about 2.5% is freshwater. (The
salt in oceans and some lakes make it unusable for drinking, agriculture, etc.
without expensive desalinization processing.) Of the world’s freshwater 68.7%
is in ice caps and glaciers, 30.1% is underground, ~1% is other, and barely
0.3% is fresh surface water! That’s about 0.009% of our total is fresh surface
water. Freshwater is lakes (87%), swamps (11%) and rivers (2%). So as we divert
and consume the fresh water available to us – taking from rivers and aquifers –
the impacts become ever greater as rivers dry and ancient aquifers are depleted.
This year the theme is Water & Energy. Most people don’t realize the Nexus of Water
and Energy.
The
Water Bubble and Water Wars
The water bubble may be coming faster
than we originally thought... Water sources, especially the invisible
underwater aquifers are being depleted.
This will show in increased prices for water, water shortages and food
shortages/prices (Marks, 2009). “We're fast draining the fresh water resources
our farms rely on, warns Lester Brown, president of the Earth Policy Institute”
(George, 2011). Our own Ogallala Aquifer in the high plans of the US (underground
aquifer from Texas through Wyoming) will be depleted in about 25 years. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogallala_Aquifer.).
Water wars and water conflicts are expected to increase dramatically. Counties (and states) that are at the headwaters of rivers can take all the water and leave nothing for the cities, farmers and fishermen below.
Water wars and water conflicts are expected to increase dramatically. Counties (and states) that are at the headwaters of rivers can take all the water and leave nothing for the cities, farmers and fishermen below.
Worst case, and a horrible
example, is the Aral Sea. What used to be the world’s 4th largest
lake is now mostly dry, highly salty and toxically polluted. Russia has been consuming
the water that would have run downstream (and through) the former USSR state of
Kazakhstan. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea
and the following news video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8b0svfuO_k
at Russia Today.)
The truth of the matter is... that water
matters! …
Even in Florida where we are surrounded
by H2O.
What can we do?
Basically, we need to become more
informed about the sustainability impact of all we say and do. We need to
become more informed consumers of water. Maybe compute our water footprint.
Please fill out the H2O Footprint calculator.
We need to start conserving more water, more energy and more resource. (Recycling
actually saves huge amounts of energy and water.)
1)
Compute your water footprint
(and take actions to reduce it):
b.
At National Geographic: http://www.fooducate.com/blog/2010/03/22/eight-interesting-facts-on-world-water-day/
2)
The average American uses
2,000 gallons per day, more than twice the global average when all things are
considered. (Most of the statistics will show only about 1,000 gpd, but they
don’t include food, energy, etc.)
3)
For Florida-centric details
& water-saving tips, please visit: www.WaterMatters.org and www.savewaterfl.com.
4)
References and links below.
Look for information about Earth Day
2014 coming up on Tuesday April 22.
Thanks for listening, reading, and thinking about
sustainability.
Let’s be good stewards of our God-given resources:
water and more.
Some References
George, L. (2011, Feb. 2) Earth economist: The food
bubble is about to burst . New Scientist.
Retrieved from: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20927986.400-earth-economist-the-food-bubble-is-about-to-burst.html
Marks, S. J. (2009). Aqua shock: The water crisis in America. NY, NY: Bloomberg Press.
Some Links:
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Skeptical Science on a Skeptical Scientist: Patrick Moore on climate change
Is there really a debate as to whether humans are contributing to Global Warming?
This will take you some time, so if you are looking for a couple quick sound-bites, skip this entire post, and absolutely, skip the videos.
Dr. Patrick Moore was recently pointed out to me as a qualified scientist and a active skeptic of Global Warming. Read about Moore on Wikipedia. He was an active founder of Greenpeace, but left the greenie organization when they become too radical. He thinks that Greenpeace has moved toward more social and anti-capitalistic agendas, not so much the protection of the environment that Greenpeace was founded on.
Now he is very skeptical of many things, especially the man-made contribution to global warming.
Moore has become a PR guy for some of the most criticized companies and industries by environmental groups. Working, and consulting for 'the enemy' is not at all a bad thing. Being in the economic engine side of energy production, metals, etc., can give people detailed insight into complete solutions to major issues. But this does not seem to be how Moore functions; his interviews and books seem to actually be an extension of his job as a PR guy. See the criticism at the end of his Wikipedia page.
(Wiki note: The Wikipedia entry seem mature, with about 700 edits, 21 over the last 30 days and the most recent edit today. No editorial complaints. Note that there are no articles outside links to this page, so Moore does not seem to be the indisputable expert he might lead us to believe.)
There are many interviews of Moore that seem rational and reasonable enough on the surface: Hannity Feb 2014, and Fox Business Network with Stuart Varney pushing his book, Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout. But, don't watch these videos unless you are willing to go look that the scientific breakdown of what Moore has to say. Point by point, issue by issue.
This is a blog by John Mason (2012, Aug 25).
Unpicking a Gish-Gallop: former Greenpeace figure Patrick Moore on climate change:
Mason takes on the details of an interview in which Moore lavishes on facts, figures, assumptions and conclusions. And Mason breaks it down point-by-point with the best facts that exist today. Mason gives some of the best, and most factual, address of the issues associated with "Global Warming" and those who would say their "ain't no such thing". And he did it all without "sensationalist scare tactics".
When you are done, ask yourself: Who was the most shrill and panic? Who presented the facts with the most facts? Who's probabilities are most probable, give the facts?
This SustainZine blog does not devote much time to the debate over "Global Warming". Life's too short. There is global warming. Moore and Mason agree on this. Humans contribute to global warming. Moore says only a little; Mason (and the IPCC scientists) say humans contribute a lot to global warming. One of the last skeptical climate scientist Richard Muller, said that there was global warming and that humans are a major cause. Blogs here. Muller's research was funded by the Koch brothers.
This blog, however, focuses on Sustainability. Sustainability is good. Activities and business models that are non-sustainable are broken models. (Hah, you thought I was going to say "Bad".). A steady move toward 100% sustainability is not only a good plan, it is a sane plan. (Hah, you thought I was going to use the words "insane not to do so...".)
So let's get past this foolish debate and have real people and real companies start making real progress toward sustainability. If businesses and communities and individuals take long enough to get started on serious efforts to become sustainable, then governments will (start to) take charge.
What probably scares people more than Global Warming itself, actually, is that Governments far and wide will jump into the mix to "fix" things.
We especially like efforts that will save money, save time, save resources and reduce our impact on the environment. Usually, we "don't need no government" for that. (Actually that, not entirely true, but subject of another story.)
Responsible vs. Irresponsible.
You choose?
'via Blog this'
This will take you some time, so if you are looking for a couple quick sound-bites, skip this entire post, and absolutely, skip the videos.
Dr. Patrick Moore was recently pointed out to me as a qualified scientist and a active skeptic of Global Warming. Read about Moore on Wikipedia. He was an active founder of Greenpeace, but left the greenie organization when they become too radical. He thinks that Greenpeace has moved toward more social and anti-capitalistic agendas, not so much the protection of the environment that Greenpeace was founded on.
Now he is very skeptical of many things, especially the man-made contribution to global warming.
Moore has become a PR guy for some of the most criticized companies and industries by environmental groups. Working, and consulting for 'the enemy' is not at all a bad thing. Being in the economic engine side of energy production, metals, etc., can give people detailed insight into complete solutions to major issues. But this does not seem to be how Moore functions; his interviews and books seem to actually be an extension of his job as a PR guy. See the criticism at the end of his Wikipedia page.
(Wiki note: The Wikipedia entry seem mature, with about 700 edits, 21 over the last 30 days and the most recent edit today. No editorial complaints. Note that there are no articles outside links to this page, so Moore does not seem to be the indisputable expert he might lead us to believe.)
There are many interviews of Moore that seem rational and reasonable enough on the surface: Hannity Feb 2014, and Fox Business Network with Stuart Varney pushing his book, Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout. But, don't watch these videos unless you are willing to go look that the scientific breakdown of what Moore has to say. Point by point, issue by issue.
This is a blog by John Mason (2012, Aug 25).
Unpicking a Gish-Gallop: former Greenpeace figure Patrick Moore on climate change:
Mason takes on the details of an interview in which Moore lavishes on facts, figures, assumptions and conclusions. And Mason breaks it down point-by-point with the best facts that exist today. Mason gives some of the best, and most factual, address of the issues associated with "Global Warming" and those who would say their "ain't no such thing". And he did it all without "sensationalist scare tactics".
When you are done, ask yourself: Who was the most shrill and panic? Who presented the facts with the most facts? Who's probabilities are most probable, give the facts?
This SustainZine blog does not devote much time to the debate over "Global Warming". Life's too short. There is global warming. Moore and Mason agree on this. Humans contribute to global warming. Moore says only a little; Mason (and the IPCC scientists) say humans contribute a lot to global warming. One of the last skeptical climate scientist Richard Muller, said that there was global warming and that humans are a major cause. Blogs here. Muller's research was funded by the Koch brothers.
This blog, however, focuses on Sustainability. Sustainability is good. Activities and business models that are non-sustainable are broken models. (Hah, you thought I was going to say "Bad".). A steady move toward 100% sustainability is not only a good plan, it is a sane plan. (Hah, you thought I was going to use the words "insane not to do so...".)
So let's get past this foolish debate and have real people and real companies start making real progress toward sustainability. If businesses and communities and individuals take long enough to get started on serious efforts to become sustainable, then governments will (start to) take charge.
What probably scares people more than Global Warming itself, actually, is that Governments far and wide will jump into the mix to "fix" things.
We especially like efforts that will save money, save time, save resources and reduce our impact on the environment. Usually, we "don't need no government" for that. (Actually that, not entirely true, but subject of another story.)
Responsible vs. Irresponsible.
You choose?
'via Blog this'
Monday, March 10, 2014
Day Light Savings Time... And Energy Efficiency... and Sustainability
While you are are staying up late, thinking about saving time and saving money...
Give a look at the past blog post here on EE and DST and California's discussion about Daylight Savings Time.
This is the heart of sustainability: things that we can do right here, right now, to move toward more sustainability. Some of them might be only small changes, like adjusting the clock to start earlier in the day, when sun gets up earlier...
One other idea is to move to LED lights. If 10% of our utilites comes from lighting, and LEDs will save us about 70%.... That cuts about 7% of our electric production. if utilities are about 2.5% of our $16.15T GDP... That's $28B per year. Every year. As a perpetuity at 5% interest that would be a half trillion dollars ($565B). These are rough numbers, but the concept holds up nicely.
Give a look at the past blog post here on EE and DST and California's discussion about Daylight Savings Time.
This is the heart of sustainability: things that we can do right here, right now, to move toward more sustainability. Some of them might be only small changes, like adjusting the clock to start earlier in the day, when sun gets up earlier...
One other idea is to move to LED lights. If 10% of our utilites comes from lighting, and LEDs will save us about 70%.... That cuts about 7% of our electric production. if utilities are about 2.5% of our $16.15T GDP... That's $28B per year. Every year. As a perpetuity at 5% interest that would be a half trillion dollars ($565B). These are rough numbers, but the concept holds up nicely.
| GDP | Factor | $16.15 | T |
| $ Energy | 2.50% | $ 403.75 | B |
| % Lights | 10% | $ 40.38 | B |
| Savings | 70% | $ 28.26 | B |
| Perpetuity | 5% | $ 565.25 | B |
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
Chris McKnett: The investment logic for sustainability | Talk Video | TED
Chris McKnett: The investment logic for sustainability | Talk Video | TED:
Chris McKnett gives a wonderful talk on investing and the idea that all investors should start looking at ESG (economic, social and governance). The economic is obvious, profits. Social is the impact to people in general, and governance is corporate social responsibility (CSR).
Generally the research shows that there is no downside to being socially (and environmentally) sustainable. But in the long term, some of these companies that are irresponsible can be expected to lag behind.
Chris implies that as an investor it could be (?is?) irresponsible to invest in companies that are and continue to be non-sustainable. The point is that the downside risk is dramatically increased for non-sustainable companies and those that don't aggressively plan related to their non-sustainable ways.
Maybe an example would be having a lumber-based business where you are chopping down the trees. A sustainable plan would be to replant at the rate of usage. At a minimum, you should find another country with too many trees, so you can get past the inevitable lumber crunch on the horizon...
One of the beauties of this talk is that it focuses on just the financials of the sustainability issue. If big institutional investors started seriously considering the sustainability of their investors, then it would become front and center to all investments everywhere.
The problem with non-sustainable business practices is that they always, always, have negative externalities associated with them. And we all bear the costs of their negligence.
'via Blog this'
Chris McKnett gives a wonderful talk on investing and the idea that all investors should start looking at ESG (economic, social and governance). The economic is obvious, profits. Social is the impact to people in general, and governance is corporate social responsibility (CSR).
Generally the research shows that there is no downside to being socially (and environmentally) sustainable. But in the long term, some of these companies that are irresponsible can be expected to lag behind.
Chris implies that as an investor it could be (?is?) irresponsible to invest in companies that are and continue to be non-sustainable. The point is that the downside risk is dramatically increased for non-sustainable companies and those that don't aggressively plan related to their non-sustainable ways.
Maybe an example would be having a lumber-based business where you are chopping down the trees. A sustainable plan would be to replant at the rate of usage. At a minimum, you should find another country with too many trees, so you can get past the inevitable lumber crunch on the horizon...
One of the beauties of this talk is that it focuses on just the financials of the sustainability issue. If big institutional investors started seriously considering the sustainability of their investors, then it would become front and center to all investments everywhere.
The problem with non-sustainable business practices is that they always, always, have negative externalities associated with them. And we all bear the costs of their negligence.
'via Blog this'
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Becoming food independent with a short book and a small farm plot (4 x 4).
Here's and interesting little video -- sales pitch really -- related to growing your own food. Of course you need to buy the book to really get started.
I really don't like the high-level hyperbole, but the underlying concepts are probably okay. Crisis Education, however, implies how dooms-day and shrill it sounds.
I like the idea of concentrated farming, urban farming, and in-side (making your house greener) grow. Kinda makes you wander if they aren't promoting a "grow house" concept for those locales where the green crop might be just a little illegal!:-)
https://www.crisiseducation.com/landing/reports/4foot-farm-blueprint/video/index-grocery2.php?
Labels: GMO, farming, urban farm, Monsanto
I really don't like the high-level hyperbole, but the underlying concepts are probably okay. Crisis Education, however, implies how dooms-day and shrill it sounds.
I like the idea of concentrated farming, urban farming, and in-side (making your house greener) grow. Kinda makes you wander if they aren't promoting a "grow house" concept for those locales where the green crop might be just a little illegal!:-)
https://www.crisiseducation.com/landing/reports/4foot-farm-blueprint/video/index-grocery2.php?
Labels: GMO, farming, urban farm, Monsanto
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)